DoD Awards $806M for Airborne Radio/TV Equipment, Awarded Sole-Source to GEC Marconi/Rockwell Collins

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $199,194,239 ($199.2M)

Contractor: GEC Marconi/Rockwell Collins D

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 1997-12-15

End Date: 2010-12-31

Contract Duration: 4,764 days

Daily Burn Rate: $41.8K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 199805!1700!0158!D0221!SPACE AND NAVAL WARFARE SYSTEMS !N0003996C0038 !A!*!P00004 !19971215!20000930!806615514!614764918!210116406!N!0D0D0!GEC MARCONI/ROCKWELL COLLINS D!350 COLLINS RD NE !CEDAR RAPIDS !IA!52498!12000!113!19!CEDAR RAPIDS !LINN !IOWA !0001!+000003813766!N!N!000000000000!5821!RADIO AND TV COMM EQUIPMENT, AIRBORNE !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION !2000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !3669!1!*!*!*!B!A!*!C !N!J!1!001!N!1A!Z!N!A!* !* !N!C!*!A!A!A!A!A!*!* !*!N!A!A!N!*!*!*!*!*!

Place of Performance

Location: CEDAR RAPIDS, LINN County, IOWA, 52498

State: Iowa Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $199.2 million to GEC MARCONI/ROCKWELL COLLINS D for work described as: 199805!1700!0158!D0221!SPACE AND NAVAL WARFARE SYSTEMS !N0003996C0038 !A!*!P00004 !19971215!20000930!806615514!614764918!210116406!N!0D0D0!GEC MARCONI/ROCKWELL COLLINS D!350 COLLINS RD NE !CEDAR RAPIDS !IA!52498!12000!113!19!CEDAR RAPIDS !LINN … Key points: 1. Contract awarded for airborne radio and TV communication equipment. 2. Significant value of $806.6 million over a 13-year period. 3. Sole-source award raises questions about competition and potential overpricing. 4. Sector is Defense, specifically electronics and communication systems.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $806.6 million for airborne radio and TV communication equipment appears high, especially given the sole-source nature of the award. Without competitive bidding, it's difficult to benchmark against similar contracts to determine fair pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

The contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, indicating a lack of competition. This method limits price discovery and may lead to higher costs for the government compared to a competitively bid contract.

Taxpayer Impact: The sole-source award for a large sum raises concerns about taxpayer money being potentially overspent due to the absence of competitive pressure on pricing.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may be paying a premium for critical defense communication equipment due to the lack of competition. The long duration of the contract (over 13 years) suggests a potential for sustained higher costs if not properly managed. Dependence on a single supplier for essential airborne communication systems could pose a supply chain risk.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Sole-source award
  • Long contract duration
  • High contract value

Positive Signals

  • Essential defense equipment
  • Established supplier

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically for electronics and communication equipment vital for military operations. Spending benchmarks in this area can vary widely based on technological sophistication and quantity, but sole-source awards often deviate from competitive norms.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication in the provided data whether small businesses were involved in this contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors. Further investigation would be needed to assess small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The sole-source nature of this large contract warrants close oversight to ensure fair pricing and prevent potential waste, fraud, or abuse. Accountability for the justification of the sole-source award and ongoing performance monitoring is crucial.

Related Government Programs

  • Department of Defense Contracting
  • Defense Contract Management Agency Programs

Risk Flags

  • Lack of competition may lead to inflated prices.
  • Long contract duration increases risk of obsolescence and cost overruns.
  • Potential for reduced innovation due to single supplier.
  • Limited transparency in pricing due to sole-source award.

Tags

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

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $199.2 million to GEC MARCONI/ROCKWELL COLLINS D. 199805!1700!0158!D0221!SPACE AND NAVAL WARFARE SYSTEMS !N0003996C0038 !A!*!P00004 !19971215!20000930!806615514!614764918!210116406!N!0D0D0!GEC MARCONI/ROCKWELL COLLINS D!350 COLLINS RD NE !CEDAR RAPIDS !IA!52498!12000!113!19!CEDAR RAPIDS !LINN !IOWA !0001!+000003813766!N!N!000000000000!5821!RADIO AND TV COMM EQUIPMENT, AIRBORNE !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION !2000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !3669!1!*!*!*!B!A!*!C !N!J!1!0

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GEC MARCONI/ROCKWELL COLLINS D.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $199.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1997-12-15. End: 2010-12-31.

What was the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis, and was it adequately documented?

The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED'. A thorough review of the contract file would be necessary to ascertain the specific justification, such as unique capabilities, urgent need, or lack of viable alternatives. Without this documentation, it's difficult to assess the validity of the sole-source determination and ensure taxpayer funds were used appropriately.

How does the per-unit cost of this airborne radio and TV equipment compare to similar systems procured through competitive means?

Benchmarking the per-unit cost is challenging without access to comparable competitive contracts for similar airborne radio and TV communication equipment. The sole-source nature of this $806.6 million award suggests that a competitive analysis was likely not performed, potentially leading to a higher per-unit cost than might be achieved in an open market.

What measures are in place to ensure the effectiveness and continued relevance of this communication equipment over the contract's extended 13-year duration?

Given the long contract term (ending in 2010, awarded in 1997), it is crucial to understand the government's strategy for managing technological obsolescence and ensuring the equipment remains effective. This includes provisions for upgrades, maintenance, and potential renegotiation if technology advances significantly or operational needs change.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 350 COLLINS RD NE, CEDAR RAPIDS, IA, 52498

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: 1997-12-15

Current End Date: 2010-12-31

Potential End Date: 2010-12-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2021-07-29

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending