Raytheon Missile Systems Awarded $794.6M for Guns, Through 30 MM by Naval Sea Systems Command

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $73,363,084 ($73.4M)

Contractor: Raytheon Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 1996-10-17

End Date: 2004-11-07

Contract Duration: 2,943 days

Daily Burn Rate: $24.9K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 199703!1700!0146!BZ005!NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0002496C5431 !A!*!P00011 !19961017!20020930!794598573!147354161!005356613!N!15090!RAYTHEON MISSILE SYSTEMS COMPA!1151 E HERMANS RD !TUCSON !AZ!85706!77000!019!04!TUCSON !PIMA !ARIZONA !0001!+000002518020!N!N!000000000000!1005!GUNS, THROUGH 30 MM !A5 !WEAPONS !2000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !3489!3!*!*!C!B!A!*!D !U!U!1!001!N!7A!A!Y!Z!* !* !N!C!*!A!A!A!A!A!*!* !*!N!A!C!N!*!*!*!*!*!

Place of Performance

Location: TUCSON, PIMA County, ARIZONA, 85756

State: Arizona Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $73.4 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY for work described as: 199703!1700!0146!BZ005!NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0002496C5431 !A!*!P00011 !19961017!20020930!794598573!147354161!005356613!N!15090!RAYTHEON MISSILE SYSTEMS COMPA!1151 E HERMANS RD !TUCSON !AZ!85706!77000!019!04!TUCSON !PIMA … Key points: 1. Significant contract value of $794.6 million awarded to Raytheon Missile Systems. 2. Contract is for 'Guns, Through 30 MM', indicating a focus on ordnance and weapon systems. 3. The contract was 'NOT COMPETED', raising questions about the procurement process and potential cost efficiencies. 4. The sector is Defense, a major area of federal spending with ongoing demand for advanced weaponry.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $794.6 million is substantial. Without comparable contracts for similar 'Guns, Through 30 MM' systems, it's difficult to assess if this pricing is competitive or represents good value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was 'NOT COMPETED', indicating a sole-source or limited competition award. This procurement method can lead to higher prices due to a lack of competitive pressure and potentially less rigorous price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition suggests taxpayers may not have received the best possible price for these weapon systems, potentially leading to overspending.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the non-competitive nature of this large defense contract. The contract supports the development and production of critical weapon systems for the Navy. Raytheon Missile Systems, a major defense contractor, benefits significantly from this award. The extended duration of the contract (1996-2004) suggests a long-term need for these systems.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition
Potential for overpricing due to sole-source award
Significant taxpayer investment in defense systems

Positive Signals

Award to a major defense contractor
Supports critical military hardware
Long-term contract indicates sustained need

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically related to weapons systems. Federal spending in this area is consistently high, driven by national security needs and technological advancements in military hardware.

Small Business Impact

The data does not indicate any specific provisions or benefits for small businesses in this contract. Large defense contracts are often awarded to prime contractors who may then subcontract, but direct small business participation is not evident here.

Oversight & Accountability

The 'NOT COMPETED' status warrants further oversight to ensure the justification for sole-source procurement was sound and that the pricing was fair and reasonable. Accountability for the expenditure of taxpayer funds is crucial.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Contracting
Defense Contract Management Agency Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of competitive bidding
Potential for inflated costs
Limited transparency in procurement
Significant taxpayer expenditure without clear value comparison

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $73.4 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY. 199703!1700!0146!BZ005!NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0002496C5431 !A!*!P00011 !19961017!20020930!794598573!147354161!005356613!N!15090!RAYTHEON MISSILE SYSTEMS COMPA!1151 E HERMANS RD !TUCSON !AZ!85706!77000!019!04!TUCSON !PIMA !ARIZONA !0001!+000002518020!N!N!000000000000!1005!GUNS, THROUGH 30 MM !A5 !WEAPONS !2000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !3489!3!*!*!C!B!A!*!D !U!U!1!0

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RAYTHEON 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 $73.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1996-10-17. End: 2004-11-07.

What was the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis, and was a full and open competition truly not feasible?

The justification for a sole-source award typically involves factors like unique capabilities, urgent need, or lack of viable alternatives. Without access to the specific justification documentation for this contract, it's impossible to definitively state why full and open competition was bypassed. However, such decisions often raise concerns about potential missed opportunities for cost savings and innovation that competition can foster.

How does the cost per unit or the overall pricing structure of this contract compare to similar weapon systems procured competitively?

Benchmarking the pricing of this $794.6 million contract against similar weapon systems procured competitively is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns and access to comparable contract data. Sole-source contracts inherently lack the price discovery mechanism of competition, making direct comparisons difficult. A thorough review would require analyzing the contract's cost-plus-fixed-fee structure and comparing it to market rates for equivalent systems.

What is the long-term strategic value and effectiveness of the 'Guns, Through 30 MM' systems procured under this contract for the U.S. Navy?

The long-term strategic value and effectiveness of these weapon systems depend on their technological capabilities, reliability, and integration into naval platforms. As a significant investment, these systems are presumably intended to meet specific operational requirements for firepower and defense. Their true effectiveness would be measured by their performance in training, exercises, and potential combat scenarios, contributing to the Navy's overall mission readiness.

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: Rockwell Collins Australia PTY Limited

Address: 1151 E HERMANS RD, TUCSON, AZ, 85756

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

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline