Naval Sea Systems Command awards $10.6M contract for guided missile warheads and explosive components

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,624,788 ($10.6M)

Contractor: Amentum Services, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-03-02

End Date: 2010-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,490 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200606!062474!1700!N00024!NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0002406C5409 !A!N! !N! !P00001!20060302!20100130!083070925!065262573!043271568!N!EG&G TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC !900 CLOPPER RD STE 200 !GAITHERSBURG !MD!20878!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLINGTON !VIRGINIA !+000000932000!N!N!000000000000!1336!GUIDED MSL WARHEADS AND EXPLOSIVE COMPS !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541330!E! !3! ! !C! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !D!U!U!1!001!N!1G!Z!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !Z!Z!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! !Y!1700!N00024!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: CHANTILLY, FAIRFAX County, VIRGINIA, 20151

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.6 million to AMENTUM SERVICES, INC. for work described as: 200606!062474!1700!N00024!NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0002406C5409 !A!N! !N! !P00001!20060302!20100130!083070925!065262573!043271568!N!EG&G TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC !900 CLOPPER RD STE 200 !GAITHERSBURG !MD!20878!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLI… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for specialized components crucial to naval defense systems. 2. The contract was not competitively bid, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies. 3. Performance period spans over four years, indicating a significant, long-term need. 4. The contractor, EG&G Technical Services, Inc., is positioned to support critical ordnance requirements. 5. This award falls within the engineering services sector, supporting complex defense manufacturing.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $10.6 million for guided missile warheads and explosive components over a four-year period suggests a substantial investment. Without direct comparable contracts or detailed cost breakdowns, it is difficult to definitively benchmark the value for money. However, the 'NOT COMPETED' status implies that a competitive bidding process was bypassed, which can sometimes lead to less favorable pricing for the government compared to open competition.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not open to competition from multiple bidders. This approach is typically used when only one source is capable of meeting the government's requirements, often due to proprietary technology, unique expertise, or urgent needs. The lack of competition means that price discovery through market forces was limited, and the government relied on negotiation to establish a fair price.

Taxpayer Impact: For taxpayers, a sole-source award means there is a reduced opportunity to benefit from cost savings that might arise from a competitive bidding process. The government must ensure robust negotiation and oversight to confirm the price is reasonable.

Public Impact

The U.S. Navy benefits from the supply of essential components for guided missile systems. Services delivered include the provision of warheads and explosive components, critical for ordnance. The geographic impact is primarily within the defense industrial base, supporting national security. Workforce implications include specialized manufacturing and technical roles within the contractor's organization.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may result in higher costs than a competitively bid contract.
Limited transparency into the pricing structure due to sole-source award.
Potential for vendor lock-in if EG&G Technical Services, Inc. is the only provider of these specific components.

Positive Signals

Contract awarded to a known entity, EG&G Technical Services, Inc., suggesting established capabilities.
The contract supports a critical defense need, ensuring readiness of naval assets.
Long-term award indicates a stable demand and potential for sustained support.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically supporting the procurement of specialized components for guided missile systems. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330, Engineering Services, indicates the nature of the work. The market for such specialized defense components is often characterized by high barriers to entry due to technical expertise, security clearances, and established relationships with government agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to ascertain without more specific details on the components and their intended use.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor is there an indication of significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses based on the provided data. The award to EG&G Technical Services, Inc., a presumably larger entity, suggests that the primary focus was on specialized capabilities rather than small business participation. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) and the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and delivery schedules. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award, but contract modifications and performance reports would be subject to internal government review and potentially Inspector General oversight if issues arise.

Related Government Programs

Guided Missile Systems Procurement
Ordnance and Explosives Manufacturing
Naval Weapon Systems Support
Defense Engineering Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition.
Lack of detailed technical specifications in public data.
Potential for cost overruns without competitive pressure.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.6 million to AMENTUM SERVICES, INC.. 200606!062474!1700!N00024!NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0002406C5409 !A!N! !N! !P00001!20060302!20100130!083070925!065262573!043271568!N!EG&G TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC !900 CLOPPER RD STE 200 !GAITHERSBURG !MD!20878!03000!013!51!ARLINGTON !ARLINGTON !VIRGINIA !+000000932000!N!N!000000000000!1336!GUIDED MSL WARHEADS AND EXPLOSIVE COMPS !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION EQUIP !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !541330!E! !3! ! !C! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AMENTUM SERVICES, 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 $10.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-03-02. End: 2010-03-31.

What is the specific nature of the 'guided missile warheads and explosive components' being procured, and what are their technical specifications?

The provided data indicates the procurement of 'GUIDED MSL WARHEADS AND EXPLOSIVE COMPS' under NAICS code 541330 (Engineering Services). However, specific technical specifications, detailed component breakdowns, or the exact type of guided missiles these components are intended for are not discernible from the data. This level of detail is typically found in the contract's statement of work or technical exhibits, which are not publicly available in this dataset. Understanding these specifics would be crucial for a thorough technical and value assessment.

Why was this contract awarded on a sole-source basis instead of through full and open competition?

The data explicitly states the contract type as 'NOT COMPETED', implying a sole-source award. The rationale for this decision is not provided in the dataset. Common reasons for sole-source awards include the unique capability of a single contractor, the existence of proprietary technology, urgent and compelling needs where competition is not feasible, or if the contract is a follow-on to a previous sole-source award where the original justification still holds. Without further documentation, the specific justification remains unknown.

What is the track record of EG&G Technical Services, Inc. with the Department of Defense, particularly in supplying similar ordnance components?

EG&G Technical Services, Inc. (now part of Amentum Services, Inc. as indicated by the 'co' field) has a history of contracting with the Department of Defense. While this specific dataset doesn't detail their entire performance history, their selection for this contract suggests they possess the necessary qualifications and experience. A comprehensive assessment of their track record would involve reviewing past performance evaluations, other contracts awarded to them for similar items, and any documented issues or successes in previous engagements.

How does the pricing structure of this $10.6 million contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar components, given it was not competitively bid?

Benchmarking the pricing for this $10.6 million contract is challenging due to its sole-source nature and the lack of detailed cost information. Typically, competitive bidding allows for price discovery and comparison against market rates. Since this contract was 'NOT COMPETED', the government relied on negotiation to determine a fair price. Without access to the negotiated rates, profit margins, or detailed cost breakdowns, it's impossible to definitively state how it compares to industry benchmarks. The absence of competition inherently limits the potential for achieving the lowest possible price.

What are the potential risks associated with relying on a single contractor for critical missile components, especially in a sole-source scenario?

Relying on a single contractor for critical missile components in a sole-source scenario presents several risks. These include potential price escalation over time due to a lack of competitive pressure, reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or improve efficiency, and supply chain vulnerability if the contractor faces production issues, financial instability, or goes out of business. Furthermore, the government has limited leverage for negotiating better terms or prices. This underscores the importance of robust contract management and continuous monitoring of the contractor's performance and financial health.

What is the historical spending pattern for guided missile warheads and explosive components by the Naval Sea Systems Command?

This dataset represents a single contract award from 2006 to 2010 totaling $10.6 million. To understand historical spending patterns for guided missile warheads and explosive components by NAVSEA, a broader analysis of contract data over multiple years and across various contract vehicles would be necessary. This would involve identifying all contracts related to these specific components, their award values, durations, and the contractors involved. Such an analysis could reveal trends in demand, pricing fluctuations, and shifts in sourcing strategies over time.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: AMMUNITION AND EXPLOSIVES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Amentum Government Services Holdings LLC

Address: 4800 WESTFIELDS BLVD STE 400, CHANTILLY, VA, 20151

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline