Navy awards $44.5M contract for radar equipment, with L3Harris Technologies as the sole provider

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $44,471,884 ($44.5M)

Contractor: L3harris Technologies, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-04-12

End Date: 2011-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,997 days

Daily Burn Rate: $22.3K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200607!062639!1700!N00024!NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0002406C5204 !A!N! !N! ! !20060412!20090412!058004482!058004482!001216845!N!ITT INDUSTRIES, INC !7821 ORION AVE !VAN NUYS !CA!91406!82128!037!06!VAN NUYS !LOS ANGELES !CALIFORNIA!+000002304554!N!N!000000000000!5840!RADAR EQUIPMENT, EXCEPT AIRBORNE !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !334511!E! !1! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !B! !D!N!R!1!001!N!1G!Z!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !A!A!A!A!000!A!C!Y! ! ! ! !1700!N00024!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: VAN NUYS, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 91406

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $44.5 million to L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC for work described as: 200607!062639!1700!N00024!NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0002406C5204 !A!N! !N! ! !20060412!20090412!058004482!058004482!001216845!N!ITT INDUSTRIES, INC !7821 ORION AVE !VAN NUYS !CA!91406!82128!037!06!VAN NUYS !LOS … Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about price discovery and potential cost savings. 2. Significant duration of nearly 2000 days suggests a long-term need for the radar equipment. 3. The contract's value of $44.5 million places it within a substantial spending category for defense electronics. 4. L3Harris Technologies, a major defense contractor, is the incumbent provider, indicating potential reliance. 5. The Public Law 114-264 designation suggests a specific justification for the sole-source award. 6. The contract falls under the 'Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing' NAICS code.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $44.5 million for radar equipment needs further benchmarking against similar sole-source awards for comparable systems. Without competitive bidding, it is difficult to definitively assess if this represents excellent value for money. The 'cost plus award fee' structure implies that performance incentives are tied to the fee, but the baseline cost is not subject to competitive pressure. Further analysis of the award fee structure and historical performance would be needed to fully evaluate value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one bidder, L3Harris Technologies, was considered. The data indicates a 'NOT COMPETED' status, suggesting that full and open competition was not pursued. This approach is often justified by specific circumstances, such as the unique capabilities of a single provider or national security concerns. However, the lack of competition limits the opportunity for price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers do not benefit from the price reductions typically achieved through competitive bidding. This can result in higher overall spending for the government and, consequently, for taxpayers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the U.S. Navy, which receives critical radar equipment essential for its operations. The contract delivers specialized radar systems, likely for naval vessels or shore-based installations. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, with potential for deployment globally with naval assets. The contract supports jobs within L3Harris Technologies and its supply chain, particularly in manufacturing and engineering roles.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pressure, potentially increasing costs for taxpayers.
Lack of transparency in the bidding process due to sole-source nature.
Long contract duration could lead to cost overruns if not managed effectively.
Reliance on a single contractor may create vendor lock-in and reduce future flexibility.

Positive Signals

Award to a known, established defense contractor (L3Harris Technologies) suggests a degree of reliability.
Cost Plus Award Fee structure can incentivize contractor performance if well-defined.
The contract is for essential radar equipment, indicating a critical need for national security.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically the manufacturing of electronic and communication equipment. The NAICS code 334511, 'Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing,' represents a specialized segment of the defense industrial base. Spending in this area is often characterized by high research and development costs, long product lifecycles, and significant government oversight due to national security implications. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other major defense procurements for similar advanced electronic systems.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting plans for small businesses within the provided data. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal, and opportunities for small businesses to participate in this specific procurement are limited unless they are part of L3Harris Technologies' supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the Department of Defense's contract management agencies, such as the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). The 'cost plus award fee' (PT: COST PLUS AWARD FEE) structure suggests that performance metrics and financial accountability are key areas of oversight. Transparency is limited by the sole-source nature of the award. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Contracts
Defense Electronics Procurement
Radar Systems Acquisition
Sole-Source Defense Contracts
Cost Plus Award Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for cost overruns
Long contract duration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $44.5 million to L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 200607!062639!1700!N00024!NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0002406C5204 !A!N! !N! ! !20060412!20090412!058004482!058004482!001216845!N!ITT INDUSTRIES, INC !7821 ORION AVE !VAN NUYS !CA!91406!82128!037!06!VAN NUYS !LOS ANGELES !CALIFORNIA!+000002304554!N!N!000000000000!5840!RADAR EQUIPMENT, EXCEPT AIRBORNE !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !334511!E! !1! ! ! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, 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 $44.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-04-12. End: 2011-09-30.

What specific radar capabilities does this contract procure, and how do they align with current naval operational requirements?

The contract specifies 'RADAR EQUIPMENT, EXCEPT AIRBORNE' under the PSC code 5840. While the exact technical specifications are not detailed in the provided data, radar systems for naval applications are critical for surveillance, target acquisition, navigation, and electronic warfare. These systems are essential for maintaining situational awareness, defending against threats, and enabling effective mission execution. The procurement by Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) indicates a direct link to fleet readiness and operational capabilities. The long duration of the contract (nearly 2000 days) suggests a need for advanced, potentially customized, radar technology that supports evolving naval doctrine and technological advancements in threat detection and response.

What is the historical spending pattern for this specific contract vehicle or similar radar equipment procurements by NAVSEA?

The provided data represents a single definitive contract awarded in 2006 with an estimated value of $44.5 million. To understand historical spending patterns, one would need to examine NAVSEA's procurement history for radar equipment over several fiscal years. This would involve querying databases for similar contracts, analyzing trends in contract values, competition levels, and award types (e.g., sole-source vs. competitive). A pattern of sole-source awards for specific radar systems might indicate a lack of market competition or a reliance on proprietary technology. Conversely, a trend towards competitive bidding could suggest a maturing market or a strategic shift by the Navy to leverage competition for better pricing and innovation.

What are the key performance metrics and award fee criteria associated with this Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract?

The contract type is 'COST PLUS AWARD FEE' (PT: COST PLUS AWARD FEE), which means the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs and receives a base fee plus an award fee. The award fee is contingent upon meeting or exceeding specific performance objectives defined in the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS). While the exact metrics are not provided, typical performance criteria for radar equipment contracts could include reliability (Mean Time Between Failures - MTBF), maintainability, technical performance (e.g., detection range, accuracy), delivery schedules, and quality standards. The government's Contracting Officer or their representative evaluates the contractor's performance against these criteria, and the resulting score determines the amount of the award fee. Effective oversight of these metrics is crucial for ensuring value for money under a CPAF structure.

What is the justification for the sole-source award, and were any exceptions to full and open competition considered?

The data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED' (CT: NOT COMPETED), signifying a sole-source award. The specific justification for this sole-source determination is not detailed in the provided snippet. However, common justifications for sole-source procurements in defense include: unique capabilities possessed by only one source, urgent and compelling needs where competition is not feasible, or follow-on work to a system where only the original contractor can provide necessary modifications or sustainment. The 'Public Law 114-264' designation might also point to a specific statutory authority or exception that permitted the sole-source award. Without further documentation, such as a Justification and Approval (J&A) document, the precise rationale remains unclear.

How does the contract's duration (1997 days) and value ($44.5M) compare to industry benchmarks for similar radar system procurements?

A contract duration of 1997 days (approximately 5.5 years) is substantial and suggests a long-term requirement for the radar equipment, potentially encompassing development, production, and initial fielding. The value of $44.5 million for this duration, while significant, needs to be benchmarked against the complexity and technological sophistication of the radar system. For highly specialized military radar, this value might be considered moderate, especially if it involves advanced capabilities. However, without knowing the specific system's technical specifications, quantity, and the level of R&D involved, a precise comparison is difficult. Industry benchmarks often vary widely based on technology readiness, market competition, and the specific application (e.g., commercial vs. military). Given the sole-source nature, direct cost benchmarking is challenging.

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7821 ORION AVE, VAN NUYS, CA, 91406

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline