DoD's $39.1M engine parts contract awarded to GE, raising questions on competition and value
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $39,102,686 ($39.1M)
Contractor: General Electric Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2021-01-01
End Date: 2021-03-31
Contract Duration: 89 days
Daily Burn Rate: $439.4K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: F414 FS PBL DO 1 JAN 2021 - 31 MAR 2021
Place of Performance
Location: LYNN, ESSEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01905
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $39.1 million to GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY for work described as: F414 FS PBL DO 1 JAN 2021 - 31 MAR 2021 Key points: 1. Contract awarded to incumbent for a short duration, limiting opportunities for new entrants. 2. Pricing appears to be a fixed price, which can offer cost certainty but may not reflect market fluctuations. 3. Lack of competition suggests potential for above-market pricing or reduced innovation incentives. 4. Performance period is brief, making it difficult to assess long-term value or contractor performance trends. 5. This contract falls within the aircraft engine manufacturing sector, a highly specialized and concentrated industry. 6. The award was a delivery order against an existing contract, indicating a continuation of a prior relationship.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract's value of $39.1 million for a 3-month period is substantial for engine parts. Benchmarking against similar sole-source or limited-competition contracts for specialized aerospace components is challenging without more data. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost predictability for the government. However, the absence of competitive bidding means there's no direct market comparison to ascertain if this price represents the best value achievable. The obligated amount of $39.1M for the period suggests a high burn rate, typical for critical defense components.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded as a delivery order under a sole-source or limited-competition vehicle, specifically noted as 'NOT COMPETED'. This indicates that the Department of the Navy did not solicit bids from multiple vendors for this specific requirement. The lack of open competition means that price discovery through market forces was bypassed. While sole-source awards can be justified for unique capabilities or existing sustainment, they inherently reduce the pressure on contractors to offer the most competitive pricing.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may be paying a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without a bidding process, there is less assurance that the price reflects the lowest possible cost for these essential aircraft engine parts.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense, specifically the Department of the Navy, ensuring the operational readiness of aircraft. The services delivered involve the provision of critical engine parts, likely for maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) of military aircraft. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, supporting defense logistics and readiness. Workforce implications include supporting specialized manufacturing jobs within the aerospace and defense sector, particularly at General Electric.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition limits opportunities for other manufacturers and potentially increases costs.
- Short contract duration may indicate a stop-gap measure rather than a strategic long-term procurement.
- Reliance on a single source for critical parts can create supply chain vulnerabilities.
Positive Signals
- Award to a known entity (General Electric) suggests a focus on established supply chains and quality.
- Firm fixed-price contract provides budget certainty for the government.
- The contract supports the sustainment of critical defense assets, ensuring operational readiness.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Aircraft Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing sector (NAICS 336412), a highly specialized segment of the aerospace industry. This sector is characterized by high barriers to entry, significant R&D investment, and a limited number of major players, including General Electric. The market size for military aircraft engine components is substantial, driven by global defense spending. This contract represents a portion of the ongoing sustainment and readiness efforts for naval aviation fleets, fitting within the broader defense industrial base.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates this contract was not competed and was awarded to General Electric Company. There is no explicit information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans associated with this specific delivery order. Given the nature of specialized engine parts manufacturing, it is possible that larger prime contractors like GE utilize a network of suppliers, which may include small businesses. However, without specific subcontracting goals or reporting, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this particular award remains unclear.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Defense's contracting and financial management regulations. The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) likely provides oversight for contract performance and compliance. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, where basic award information is recorded. Inspector General (IG) offices within the DoD may investigate allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to such contracts, but specific oversight mechanisms for this delivery order are not detailed in the provided data.
Related Government Programs
- Aircraft Engine Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO)
- Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Parts Procurement
- Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Sustainment Programs
- Propulsion Systems Contracts
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Lack of competition
- Potential for above-market pricing
- Short performance period
Tags
defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-navy, aircraft-engine-parts, manufacturing, sole-source, firm-fixed-price, delivery-order, general-electric, massachusetts, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $39.1 million to GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY. F414 FS PBL DO 1 JAN 2021 - 31 MAR 2021
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is GENERAL ELECTRIC 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 $39.1 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2021-01-01. End: 2021-03-31.
What is General Electric's track record with the Department of Defense for aircraft engine parts?
General Electric Company (GE) has a long-standing and extensive track record as a primary supplier of aircraft engines and engine parts to the Department of Defense (DoD). They are a major defense contractor, consistently awarded significant contracts for both new engine production and sustainment services across various military branches, including the Navy and Air Force. Their history includes providing engines for fighter jets, bombers, and transport aircraft. While GE is a critical supplier, the scale and nature of their sole-source or limited-competition awards, as seen in this $39.1M delivery order, are often scrutinized for value and competition. Their performance is generally considered reliable for critical components, but the lack of competition in specific instances warrants careful review of pricing and justification.
How does the $39.1M value compare to similar engine parts contracts awarded by the Navy?
Comparing the $39.1 million value for a 3-month period requires context regarding the specific engine type, criticality of the parts, and the overall sustainment strategy. The Navy procures a wide range of engine parts, from routine consumables to highly specialized components for advanced platforms. Contracts can range from small, competitively bid orders for common parts to multi-billion dollar sole-source sustainment programs for entire engine fleets. This $39.1M delivery order, being sole-source and for a short duration, suggests it might be addressing a specific, urgent need or a gap in a larger sustainment program. Without knowing the exact parts and the engine platform, a direct comparison is difficult, but it represents a significant investment for a quarter-year's worth of parts, highlighting the high cost associated with maintaining advanced military aviation.
What are the primary risks associated with awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?
The primary risks associated with awarding this contract on a sole-source basis include potential overpricing, reduced innovation, and a lack of supply chain resilience. Without competition, the government loses the benefit of market forces driving down costs, potentially leading to prices higher than if multiple vendors had bid. A sole-source award can also disincentivize the incumbent contractor from seeking cost efficiencies or investing in process improvements, as there is no competitive threat. Furthermore, over-reliance on a single supplier for critical components can create vulnerabilities; if the sole-source provider experiences production issues, quality problems, or financial instability, it could significantly disrupt military readiness. This also limits opportunities for emerging or alternative suppliers to enter the market.
How effective is a firm fixed-price contract for specialized aircraft engine parts?
A Firm Fixed-Price (FFP) contract is generally considered effective for specialized aircraft engine parts when the scope of work and costs are well-defined and predictable. FFP shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor, providing the government with budget certainty. This is advantageous for procuring standard replacement parts or components where manufacturing processes are mature and material costs are stable. However, for highly specialized or novel components, or where unforeseen technical challenges may arise during production, FFP can be less flexible. In such cases, contractors might build significant contingency into their pricing to cover potential risks, potentially leading to a higher overall price than a cost-reimbursable contract with appropriate incentives. For sustainment, where parts are needed consistently, FFP can be a suitable choice if the contractor has efficient production capabilities.
What has been the historical spending trend for aircraft engine parts by the Department of the Navy?
Historical spending by the Department of the Navy (DoN) on aircraft engine parts has been substantial and generally increasing, driven by fleet modernization, aging aircraft requiring more maintenance, and the high cost of advanced propulsion systems. The DoN relies heavily on major manufacturers like General Electric and Pratt & Whitney for engines and parts across its diverse aviation platforms, including carrier-based jets, helicopters, and maritime patrol aircraft. Spending often occurs through large, multi-year sustainment contracts, as well as numerous individual delivery orders for specific parts and repair services. Factors influencing spending include operational tempo, geopolitical demands, and the introduction of new aircraft types. While specific annual figures fluctuate, the overall trend reflects a consistent and significant investment in maintaining airpower readiness, often involving a mix of competitive and sole-source procurements for specialized components.
What is the typical duration for contracts related to aircraft engine sustainment?
Contracts related to aircraft engine sustainment can vary significantly in duration, ranging from short-term orders for immediate needs to long-term, multi-year agreements. Short-duration contracts, like the 3-month period in this case ($39.1M delivery order), are often used for specific repair actions, urgent part requirements, or as bridge funding while a larger, long-term contract is being finalized. More commonly, sustainment is managed through longer-term contracts, often referred to as Performance-Based Logistics (PBL) contracts or comprehensive engine overhaul agreements. These can span 5 to 10 years or more, encompassing guaranteed availability, maintenance, repair, and overhaul services for entire engine fleets. The choice of duration depends on factors such as the criticality of the platform, the expected lifespan of the engines, the complexity of maintenance, and the desired level of contractor support and risk sharing.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Aircraft Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: ENGINES AND TURBINES AND COMPONENT
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 1000 WESTERN AVE, LYNN, MA, 01905
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: $39,102,686
Exercised Options: $39,102,686
Current Obligation: $39,102,686
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: N0038318DP601
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2021-01-01
Current End Date: 2021-03-31
Potential End Date: 2021-03-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2021-02-23
More Contracts from General Electric Company
- 200607!387702!1700!n00019!naval AIR Systems Command !N0001906C0088 !A!N! !N! ! !20060424!20090131!001408509!001408509!001367960!n!general Electric Company !1000 Western AVE !lynn !ma!01905!37490!009!25!lynn !essex !mass !+000018238000!n!n!000000000000!2840!gas Turbines and JET Engines, Acft & Comps !a1b!aircraft Engines and Spares !000 !NOT Discernable !336412!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !d!u!j!1!001!n!1a!z!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!b!y! ! ! !Y!1719!N00019!0001! ! — $2.4B (Department of Defense)
- Adaptive Engine Transition Program (aetp) — $2.1B (Department of Defense)
- 200608!001069!2100!w58rgz!usa Aviation and Missile Command!w58rgz06c0038 !A!N! !Y! ! !20051215!20101231!137488664!137488664!001367960!n!general Electric Company !1 Neumann WAY !cincinnati !oh!45215!15000!061!39!cincinnati !hamilton !ohio !+000177879422!n!n!000000000000!r706!logistics Support Services !a1b!aircraft Engines and Spares !000 !NOT Discernable !541330!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !d!n!j!1!001!n!1g!z!n!z! ! !Y!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!d!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $1.6B (Department of Defense)
- 200210!004379!1700!AA427 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001901C0147 !A!N! !N!P00001 !20020508!20031130!001408509!001408509!001367960!n!general Electric Company Inc !1000 Western AVE !lynn !ma!01910!37490!009!25!lynn !essex !mass !+000060619860!n!n!000000000000!2840!gas Turbines and JET Engines, Acft & Comps !a1b!aircraft Engines and Spares !2bjn!f414-Ge-400 !336412!E! !1! ! !C! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !d!n!j!1!001!n!1a!a!w!f! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!b!y! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $1.5B (Department of Defense)
- F414-GE-400 Engines — $1.2B (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)