Raytheon Company awarded $43.2M contract for miscellaneous machinery, with no competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $43,250,006 ($43.3M)

Contractor: Raytheon Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-10-01

End Date: 2028-09-29

Contract Duration: 1,094 days

Daily Burn Rate: $39.5K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: T/RIMM GEN 5.3.1

Place of Performance

Location: ANDOVER, ESSEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01810

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $43.3 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY for work described as: T/RIMM GEN 5.3.1 Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about price discovery and potential overpayment. 2. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs, but the lack of competition limits benchmarking. 3. Contract duration of nearly three years suggests a significant, ongoing need for these goods. 4. Awarded by the Department of the Navy, indicating a defense-related requirement. 5. The machinery falls under the 'All Other Miscellaneous General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing' NAICS code. 6. No small business set-aside was utilized for this procurement.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Without competitive bids, it is difficult to assess the value for money. The $43.2 million award for miscellaneous machinery over approximately three years lacks a clear benchmark for comparison. The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government, but the absence of competition means the government may not have secured the lowest possible price. Further analysis would require understanding the specific type of machinery and its criticality to naval operations.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one vendor, Raytheon Company, was solicited. The data indicates it was not competed. This approach bypasses the standard competitive bidding process, which typically involves multiple vendors submitting proposals. The lack of competition limits the government's ability to leverage market forces to achieve the best possible pricing and terms.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can lead to higher costs for taxpayers as there is no competitive pressure to drive down prices. This limits transparency in pricing and may result in less efficient use of public funds.

Public Impact

The Department of the Navy is the primary beneficiary, receiving essential machinery. The contract supports the manufacturing and supply of general-purpose machinery. The geographic impact is centered in Massachusetts, where the contractor is located. The contract likely supports a workforce involved in the manufacturing and delivery of these goods.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to inflated pricing.
Sole-source awards reduce transparency in government spending.
Potential for contractor lock-in due to absence of competitive alternatives.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Long-term contract (nearly 3 years) suggests a stable supply chain.
Award to a known entity (Raytheon Company) may imply established capabilities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the 'All Other Miscellaneous General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing' sector, a broad category encompassing a wide range of industrial equipment. The total federal spending in this sector is substantial, with numerous contracts awarded annually. Raytheon Company, as a major defense contractor, likely produces specialized machinery that fits within this classification. Benchmarking this specific award would require detailed knowledge of the machinery's specifications and its place within the broader industrial equipment market.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. The award to a large prime contractor like Raytheon Company suggests that the primary focus was on fulfilling the requirement directly, rather than leveraging the small business ecosystem for this particular procurement.

Oversight & Accountability

As a sole-source award, oversight is critical. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract provides some cost control. However, the lack of competition means that standard oversight mechanisms like bid protests or comparative pricing analysis are not applicable. Transparency would be enhanced by public disclosure of the justification for the sole-source award and any pre-award price negotiations.

Related Government Programs

Defense Procurement
Machinery Manufacturing
Naval Operations Support
Sole-Source Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for overpricing
Limited transparency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $43.3 million to RAYTHEON COMPANY. T/RIMM GEN 5.3.1

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RAYTHEON COMPANY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $43.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-10-01. End: 2028-09-29.

What specific type of miscellaneous general purpose machinery is being procured under this contract?

The provided data identifies the NAICS code as '333998 - All Other Miscellaneous General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing.' This is a broad category that includes machinery not elsewhere classified, such as industrial molds, industrial trucks, packaging machinery, and various other types of general industrial equipment. Without further details on the specific product description or line item numbers within the contract, it is impossible to determine the exact nature of the machinery. This lack of specificity makes it challenging to assess the appropriateness of the price or the necessity of a sole-source award.

What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The provided data explicitly states the contract type as 'NOT COMPETED,' indicating a sole-source award. However, the specific justification for this determination is not included in the data. Typically, sole-source awards require a formal justification, such as the existence of only one responsible source, an urgent and compelling need, or a national security requirement that cannot be met through competition. Without this justification, it is impossible to evaluate whether the sole-source award was appropriate and in the best interest of the government and taxpayers.

How does the $43.2 million contract value compare to similar procurements for miscellaneous machinery by the Department of Defense?

Comparing the $43.2 million contract value for miscellaneous machinery is difficult without knowing the specific type of machinery procured. The NAICS code 333998 is very broad. If this contract is for highly specialized or custom-built machinery, the price might be reasonable given the lack of competition. However, if it pertains to more standardized equipment, the absence of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing. A true comparison would require identifying contracts for identical or highly similar machinery, ideally awarded through a competitive process, which is not available in the provided data.

What is Raytheon Company's track record with the Department of the Navy for similar types of machinery?

Raytheon Company is a major defense contractor with a long history of supplying various systems and equipment to the Department of the Navy. While their primary focus is often on defense electronics, aerospace, and defense systems, they may also be involved in manufacturing or supplying specialized machinery as part of larger defense platforms or support systems. Without specific contract details or historical data on Raytheon's machinery production for the Navy, it's difficult to assess their specific track record for this particular type of 'miscellaneous general purpose machinery.' Their overall strong performance in defense contracting suggests a capacity to meet requirements, but not necessarily for this specific product category without further evidence.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award of this magnitude?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award of $43.2 million include potential overpricing due to the lack of competitive pressure, reduced innovation from the supplier as there's no incentive to offer better solutions to win future contracts, and a lack of transparency in the procurement process. Taxpayers may not be receiving the best value for their money. Furthermore, it can create a dependency on a single supplier, making future procurements potentially more difficult or expensive if the supplier's pricing or terms change unfavorably.

What oversight mechanisms are in place for this sole-source contract?

Given the sole-source nature of this contract, oversight would primarily focus on contract performance, adherence to the firm-fixed-price terms, and delivery schedules. The Department of the Navy would be responsible for monitoring Raytheon Company's compliance with the contract requirements. While standard competitive oversight is absent, the government can still conduct audits, performance reviews, and ensure that the delivered goods meet the specified quality and technical requirements. The effectiveness of oversight depends on the diligence of the contracting officer and the technical representatives assigned to the contract.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing › All Other Miscellaneous General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: N0010424RDD73

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Rockwell Collins Australia PTY Limited

Address: 1001 BOSTON POST RD E, MARLBOROUGH, MA, 01752

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $43,250,006

Exercised Options: $43,250,006

Current Obligation: $43,250,006

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 2

Total Subaward Amount: $193,307

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline