DoD Awards $835M Sikorsky Contract for SH-60 Seahawk Airframes and Spares

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $133,506,423 ($133.5M)

Contractor: Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 1999-10-01

End Date: 2011-08-25

Contract Duration: 4,346 days

Daily Burn Rate: $30.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200006!1700!000546!AC524 !NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001999C1069 !A!*!* !19990716!20020731!835551474!835551474!001344142!N!78286!SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION !6900 MAIN ST !STRATFORD !CT!06614!74190!001!09!STRATFORD !FAIRFIELD !CONN !0001!+000024800000!N!N!000000000000!AC15!RDTE/AIRCRAFT-ENG/MANUF DEVELOP !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !2AHV!SH-60 SEAHAWK !3721!1!*!*!*!B!A!*!D !N!V!1!001!N!1A!A!N!Z!* !* !N!C!*!A!A!A!A!A!A!* !*!N!A!C!N!*!*!*!*!*!

Place of Performance

Location: STRATFORD, FAIRFIELD County, CONNECTICUT, 06614

State: Connecticut Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $133.5 million to SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION for work described as: 200006!1700!000546!AC524 !NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001999C1069 !A!*!* !19990716!20020731!835551474!835551474!001344142!N!78286!SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION !6900 MAIN ST !STRATFORD !CT!06614!74190!001!09!STRATFORD !FAI… Key points: 1. Contract awarded to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation for SH-60 Seahawk airframes and spares. 2. Significant portion of the contract value ($835M) allocated to Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDTE). 3. Contract type is Cost Plus Incentive Fee, indicating potential for cost overruns. 4. No small business participation noted, raising concerns about equitable distribution of federal funds.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $835,551,474 is substantial for aircraft components. Benchmarking against similar contracts for complex aerospace systems is difficult without more detailed cost breakdowns, but the scale suggests a significant investment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was 'NOT COMPETED', suggesting a sole-source or limited competition scenario. This limits price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs for taxpayers compared to a fully competitive process.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition may result in higher prices, impacting taxpayer value. The specific justification for limited competition is not provided.

Public Impact

Supports the operational readiness of the SH-60 Seahawk helicopter fleet, crucial for naval operations. Invests in advanced aircraft manufacturing and development, potentially fostering technological innovation. Economic impact on Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation and its supply chain in Connecticut.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Lack of competition
  • Cost Plus Incentive Fee contract type
  • No small business participation

Positive Signals

  • Supports critical defense asset
  • Long-term contract duration
  • Investment in US manufacturing

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically focusing on aircraft manufacturing and development. Spending benchmarks for RDTE on complex military aircraft can vary widely, but $835M represents a significant investment in a specific platform.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates no small business participation (sb: false). This suggests that the prime contractor, Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, is a large business and that subcontracting opportunities for small businesses were either not pursued or not mandated.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract was awarded by NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, implying oversight from the Department of Defense. The 'NOT COMPETED' status warrants further scrutiny to ensure the justification for limited competition was sound and that fair pricing was achieved.

Related Government Programs

  • Department of Defense Contracting
  • Defense Contract Management Agency Programs

Risk Flags

  • Lack of competition
  • Cost Plus Incentive Fee contract type
  • No small business participation
  • Potential for cost overruns
  • Limited transparency on price justification

Tags

department-of-defense, ct, definitive-contract, 100m-plus

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $133.5 million to SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION. 200006!1700!000546!AC524 !NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001999C1069 !A!*!* !19990716!20020731!835551474!835551474!001344142!N!78286!SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION !6900 MAIN ST !STRATFORD !CT!06614!74190!001!09!STRATFORD !FAIRFIELD !CONN !0001!+000024800000!N!N!000000000000!AC15!RDTE/AIRCRAFT-ENG/MANUF DEVELOP !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !2AHV!SH-60 SEAHAWK !3721!1!*!*!*!B!A!*!D !N!V!

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $133.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1999-10-01. End: 2011-08-25.

What was the specific justification for awarding this contract on a limited or sole-source basis, and how was the price determined to be fair and reasonable?

The justification for limited competition is not detailed in the provided data. Typically, such justifications might include proprietary technology, urgent need, or lack of qualified sources. The price determination would normally involve cost analysis and comparison to similar contracts, but without the justification, it's difficult to assess the fairness and reasonableness of the $835M award.

What are the potential risks associated with a Cost Plus Incentive Fee contract for aircraft airframes and spares, particularly regarding cost overruns?

Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contracts aim to incentivize cost savings by sharing any cost underruns or overruns between the government and the contractor based on pre-defined targets. However, the 'cost plus' nature inherently carries a risk of cost overruns if the contractor's costs exceed projections. The incentive fee structure can mitigate this, but effective oversight is crucial to manage potential overspending.

How does the lack of small business participation in this large defense contract impact overall federal small business utilization goals?

When large prime contractors do not actively seek or include small businesses in their subcontracting plans for major contracts, it can hinder the achievement of federal small business utilization goals. This contract, valued at over $835 million, represents a significant missed opportunity to engage small businesses in the defense supply chain, potentially impacting their growth and the government's ability to distribute contract dollars equitably.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: RTX Corp (UEI: 001344142)

Address: 6900 MAIN ST, STRATFORD, CT, 06614

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline

Start Date: 1999-10-01

Current End Date: 2011-08-25

Potential End Date: 2011-08-25 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2021-07-28

More Contracts from Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation

View all Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending