Boeing awarded $47.4M for wing assembly, a sole-source contract with a 999-month duration
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $47,394,268 ($47.4M)
Contractor: THE Boeing Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2025-09-05
End Date: 2028-05-31
Contract Duration: 999 days
Daily Burn Rate: $47.4K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: WING ASSEMBLY,AIRCR
Place of Performance
Location: SAINT LOUIS, SAINT LOUIS County, MISSOURI, 63134
State: Missouri Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $47.4 million to THE BOEING COMPANY for work described as: WING ASSEMBLY,AIRCR Key points: 1. Contract awarded to a single, established supplier, raising questions about price competitiveness. 2. Long contract duration suggests a need for sustained supply, but also locks in terms. 3. Fixed-price contract shifts risk to the contractor for cost overruns. 4. Awarded by the Department of the Navy, indicating a critical defense need. 5. The contract falls under 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing', a specialized sector.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract value of $47.4 million over a potential 999 months (over 83 years) is difficult to benchmark without more specific details on the scope of 'wing assembly'. Given the sole-source nature, it's challenging to assess if this represents good value for money. The firm fixed-price structure is positive for cost certainty, but the extended duration could lead to price escalation if not managed carefully. Without comparable contracts or detailed cost breakdowns, a definitive value assessment is limited.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This typically occurs when only one vendor possesses the necessary capabilities, technology, or security clearances. The lack of competition means the government did not benefit from a bidding process that could drive down prices through market forces. The justification for sole-source procurement would need to be thoroughly reviewed to ensure it was appropriate.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers may not be getting the best possible price, as competition is a key driver for cost savings in government procurement.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy, ensuring the continued availability of critical aircraft components. Services delivered include the manufacturing and assembly of wing components for aircraft. The geographic impact is primarily centered around the contractor's facility in Missouri. Workforce implications include job retention and potential growth at The Boeing Company's facilities.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Long contract duration (999 months) raises concerns about long-term price fairness and potential for obsolescence.
- Sole-source award limits price discovery and competitive pressure, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers.
- Lack of competition may reduce incentives for innovation or efficiency improvements by the contractor.
Positive Signals
- Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government, transferring risk of cost overruns to the contractor.
- Award to a large, established contractor like Boeing suggests a high likelihood of successful delivery and technical capability.
- The contract supports critical defense needs, ensuring operational readiness for naval aviation assets.
Sector Analysis
The aerospace manufacturing sector is characterized by high barriers to entry, complex supply chains, and significant R&D investment. Contracts for aircraft components, especially for defense applications, are often awarded to established prime contractors like Boeing due to stringent quality, performance, and security requirements. The market size for defense aerospace components is substantial, driven by ongoing military modernization and sustainment programs. This contract fits within the broader category of defense industrial base support.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as it was awarded directly to The Boeing Company. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without specific subcontracting goals or reporting, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular award is likely minimal, though Boeing's overall subcontracting practices would be relevant.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price structure, which obligates Boeing to deliver specified components at the agreed-upon price. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature and the absence of public competitive bidding details. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- Aircraft Manufacturing
- Defense Procurement
- Naval Aviation Support
- Aerospace Components
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Extended contract duration
- Lack of detailed scope definition
Tags
defense, department-of-the-navy, the-boeing-company, sole-source, firm-fixed-price, aircraft-parts, missouri, long-term-contract, major-contractor, non-competed
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $47.4 million to THE BOEING COMPANY. WING ASSEMBLY,AIRCR
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is THE BOEING 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 $47.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2025-09-05. End: 2028-05-31.
What is the specific type of wing assembly being procured and what aircraft platform does it support?
The provided data indicates 'WING ASSEMBLY,AIRCR' as the item description, falling under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 336413 for 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing'. However, the specific aircraft platform or the exact nature of the wing assembly (e.g., primary structures, control surfaces, internal components) is not detailed in the summary data. This information is crucial for understanding the criticality of the component, its technical complexity, and for benchmarking against similar procurements. Without this context, assessing the technical risk and the appropriateness of the sole-source award is challenging.
What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis to The Boeing Company?
Sole-source awards are typically justified when only one responsible source is available or capable of meeting the government's requirements. For a major defense contractor like Boeing, this could be due to proprietary technology, unique manufacturing capabilities, existing integration with specific aircraft platforms, or national security considerations that preclude competition. The specific justification document (e.g., Justification and Approval for Other Than Full and Open Competition) would provide the detailed rationale. Understanding this justification is key to assessing whether the lack of competition was indeed unavoidable and in the government's best interest.
How does the 999-month contract duration impact the overall cost and risk profile?
A contract duration of 999 months (over 83 years) is exceptionally long and significantly impacts the cost and risk. While it provides long-term supply assurance, it also locks the government into potentially outdated pricing structures or technologies if not managed with appropriate price adjustment clauses or review periods. The risk of cost escalation due to inflation, material cost fluctuations, or changes in manufacturing processes over such a long period is substantial. Conversely, the firm fixed-price nature shifts the risk of cost overruns to Boeing. However, the sheer length of the contract raises questions about the initial pricing accuracy and the government's ability to renegotiate terms if market conditions change drastically.
What are the historical spending patterns for wing assembly with The Boeing Company or similar components?
The provided data only shows this specific award. To assess historical spending patterns, one would need to query federal procurement databases (like FPDS or USASpending) for previous contracts awarded to The Boeing Company for 'wing assembly' or related aircraft parts (NAICS 336413) by the Department of the Navy or other Department of Defense agencies. Analyzing past contract values, durations, competition levels, and pricing structures would reveal trends, identify potential cost efficiencies or escalations over time, and provide a basis for comparing this new award against previous performance.
What are the performance metrics and quality assurance measures associated with this wing assembly contract?
The summary data does not specify the performance metrics or quality assurance measures for this contract. However, for defense aerospace components, stringent quality standards (e.g., AS9100 certification) and detailed inspection protocols are typically mandated. Performance metrics likely include on-time delivery, adherence to specifications, defect rates, and material quality. The firm fixed-price nature implies that Boeing is responsible for meeting these standards, with potential penalties or remedies for non-compliance. Detailed contract clauses would outline these specific requirements and oversight mechanisms.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT AND STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS
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: 6200 JAMES S MCDONNELL BLVD, SAINT LOUIS, MO, 63134
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: $96,722,992
Exercised Options: $96,722,992
Current Obligation: $47,394,268
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 3
Total Subaward Amount: $233,757
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: N0038322GYY01
IDV Type: BOA
Timeline
Start Date: 2025-09-05
Current End Date: 2028-05-31
Potential End Date: 2028-05-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2025-11-12
More Contracts from THE Boeing Company
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (Department of Defense)
- International Space Station — $22.4B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- 200112!000108!9700!ZD60 !ballistic Missile Defense ORG. !HQ000601C0001 !A!N!*!N! !20001222!20080930!848025649!848025649!009256819!n!the Boeing Company !3370 E Miraloma AVE !anaheim !ca!92806!37000!089!01!huntsville !madison !alabama !+000383571022!n!n!000000000000!ad93!rdte/Other Defense-Adv Tech DEV !S1 !services !1caa!ballistic Missile Defense SYS !541710!*!*!3! ! ! !*!*!*!B!*!*!A! !A !U!R!2!001!B! !Z!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $18.8B (Department of Defense)
- USN P-8A FRP II Long Lead Material — $18.1B (Department of Defense)
- 200512!010860!2100!w56hzv!tacom - Warren !w56hzv05c0724 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050923!20141231!016544780!016544780!009256819!n!the Boeing Company !J S Mcdonnell Blvd !saint Louis !mo!63166!65000!510!29!st. Louis !ST. Louis (city) !missouri !+000219245691!n!n!000000000000!az15!rdte/Other Research&development-Eng/Manuf Devel !S1 !services !301 !FCS !541330!E! !1! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !d!u!u!1!001!n!1a!z!y!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! TAS::21 2040::TAS — $12.7B (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)