Defense contract for wireless communications equipment valued at $24.8M awarded to Astronics Test Systems Inc
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $24,857,327 ($24.9M)
Contractor: Astronics Test Systems Inc
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2010-01-07
End Date: 2015-12-06
Contract Duration: 2,159 days
Daily Burn Rate: $11.5K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: RFDACS
Place of Performance
Location: IRVINE, ORANGE County, CALIFORNIA, 92618
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $24.9 million to ASTRONICS TEST SYSTEMS INC for work described as: RFDACS Key points: 1. The contract's value of $24.8 million represents a significant investment in specialized defense communications technology. 2. Competition dynamics for this contract were robust, with four bidders vying for the award. 3. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests a clear understanding of scope and cost expectations. 4. Performance occurred over a substantial period, indicating a long-term need for the equipment. 5. This contract falls within the manufacturing sector for advanced wireless communications equipment.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
While specific per-unit cost data is not provided, the total award of $24.8 million over approximately six years for specialized defense communications equipment appears reasonable given the nature of the technology. Benchmarking against similar complex electronic systems suggests that pricing was likely competitive due to the multiple bidders involved. The firm fixed-price structure further supports a controlled cost environment.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. With four bidders participating, the competition level was healthy, suggesting that the Department of the Navy received multiple proposals and had a range of options to consider. This level of competition generally fosters better price discovery and encourages contractors to offer competitive terms.
Taxpayer Impact: The robust competition for this contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Navy personnel who will utilize the advanced wireless communications equipment for operational readiness. The contract delivered essential equipment for broadcasting and wireless communications, crucial for military operations. The contract was awarded to a company located in California, implying potential workforce and economic impact within that state. The duration of the contract suggests sustained support and potential for ongoing maintenance or upgrades.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of detailed per-unit cost breakdown makes precise value-for-money assessment challenging.
- The long performance period could introduce risks related to technological obsolescence if not managed proactively.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process.
- Firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
- Multiple bidders (4) suggest a healthy market for this type of equipment.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the manufacturing sector, specifically focusing on Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment. The market for defense-grade communications technology is specialized, often characterized by high barriers to entry due to stringent performance and security requirements. Spending in this area is critical for maintaining military operational effectiveness and technological superiority. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other large-scale procurements of advanced electronic warfare or communication systems for defense applications.
Small Business Impact
The contract details indicate that small business participation was not a primary set-aside consideration for this award (sb: false). While the prime contractor is Astronics Test Systems Inc., there is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses within the provided data. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses were involved in the supply chain or as subcontractors.
Oversight & Accountability
The contract was awarded by the Department of the Navy, a component of the Department of Defense, which has established oversight mechanisms for procurement. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of cost control. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS. Specific Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to the Department of Defense for any audits or investigations related to contract performance or potential fraud.
Related Government Programs
- Defense Communications Systems
- Electronic Warfare Equipment Manufacturing
- Wireless Communication Technology Procurement
- Naval Aviation Support Systems
Risk Flags
- Potential for technological obsolescence over the contract's long duration.
- Reliance on a single contractor for critical equipment delivery and support.
Tags
defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-navy, wireless-communications-equipment, manufacturing, firm-fixed-price, definitive-contract, full-and-open-competition, california, large-contract, radio-and-television-broadcasting-and-wireless-communications-equipment-manufacturing
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $24.9 million to ASTRONICS TEST SYSTEMS INC. RFDACS
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is ASTRONICS TEST SYSTEMS INC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $24.9 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2010-01-07. End: 2015-12-06.
What is the track record of Astronics Test Systems Inc. with government contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?
Astronics Test Systems Inc. has a history of engaging with government contracts, including those with the Department of Defense. Analyzing their past performance data, including contract values, types, and any reported issues or successes, would provide insight into their reliability and capability. A review of their contract history might reveal patterns in the types of equipment or services they provide, their on-time delivery rates, and their ability to meet quality standards. This context is crucial for assessing the risk associated with awarding them significant contracts like the one for wireless communications equipment.
How does the $24.8 million contract value compare to similar procurements for wireless communications equipment within the defense sector?
The $24.8 million contract value for wireless communications equipment needs to be benchmarked against similar procurements to assess its reasonableness. Factors such as the specific capabilities of the equipment, the quantity ordered, the duration of the contract, and the technological sophistication play a significant role in determining fair market value. If comparable contracts for similar defense-grade wireless systems over a similar timeframe were awarded at lower or higher values, it would indicate whether this contract represents a particularly good or potentially overvalued deal. Without specific comparable data points, it's challenging to definitively state if the price is optimal, but the competitive nature of the award suggests it was market-driven.
What are the primary risks associated with a firm fixed-price contract of this duration (over 5 years)?
Firm fixed-price (FFP) contracts offer cost certainty but can introduce risks, especially over longer durations like this 5-year contract. For the contractor, the primary risk is underestimating costs, leading to reduced profit margins or even losses if material costs, labor rates, or unforeseen technical challenges escalate beyond projections. For the government, the risk lies in potential contractor underperformance if the contractor prioritizes cost savings over quality or timely delivery to protect their profit. Additionally, over a long period, technological advancements could render the procured equipment less effective, requiring potential modifications or replacements, which might not be fully covered under the original FFP terms without additional negotiation.
How effective are the oversight mechanisms for this type of defense contract to ensure performance and prevent cost overruns?
Oversight for Department of Defense contracts typically involves multiple layers. Contract officers and program managers are responsible for monitoring performance, ensuring compliance with contract terms, and managing the relationship with the contractor. Quality assurance representatives may be assigned to inspect deliverables. For significant contracts, the Department of Defense Inspector General (IG) can conduct audits and investigations into contract execution, financial accountability, and potential fraud or abuse. The firm fixed-price nature of this contract inherently limits the government's exposure to cost overruns, shifting that risk to the contractor, but oversight remains critical to ensure the contractor meets all performance and quality requirements.
What is the historical spending trend for similar wireless communications equipment by the Department of the Navy?
Analyzing historical spending trends for similar wireless communications equipment by the Department of the Navy is crucial for understanding budget allocation and identifying potential patterns of increased or decreased investment in this area. This specific $24.8 million contract represents a single data point. A broader analysis would involve examining spending over several fiscal years to see if this award is consistent with previous procurement levels, or if it signifies a ramp-up or reduction in spending on such technologies. Understanding these trends can help assess the long-term strategic importance the Navy places on this type of equipment and its budget sustainability.
What are the implications of awarding this contract to a single entity (Astronics Test Systems Inc.) versus a broader range of suppliers?
Awarding a contract of this magnitude to a single entity like Astronics Test Systems Inc. concentrates the delivery and support responsibilities. While this can streamline communication and project management, it also introduces dependency risk. If the contractor faces financial difficulties, production issues, or fails to meet performance standards, the Navy's access to critical wireless communications equipment could be jeopardized. The competitive bidding process mitigates some of this risk by ensuring the initial selection was based on the best value offered. However, ongoing monitoring of the contractor's performance and financial health remains essential throughout the contract's lifecycle.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Communications Equipment Manufacturing › Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: N6660409R2250
Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Astronics Corporation (UEI: 049829302)
Address: 4 GOODYEAR, IRVINE, CA, 92618
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: $26,544,453
Exercised Options: $26,544,453
Current Obligation: $24,857,327
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2010-01-07
Current End Date: 2015-12-06
Potential End Date: 2015-12-06 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2016-07-12
More Contracts from Astronics Test Systems Inc
- 200612!000634!1700!m67854!commanding General !M6785405D3011 !A!N! !N!0004 ! !20060928!20100110!807617030!807617030!082413956!n!dme Corporation !12889 Ingenuity DR !orlando !fl!32826!53000!095!12!orlando !orange !florida !+000033564976!n!n!000000000000!6625!electrical & Elct Properties Meas & TST Instrumnts!a7 !electronics and Communication Equip !000 !NOT Discernable !811219!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !n!z!a!n!j!2!002!b! !A!N!A! ! !n!a!n!n!d! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! ! !1700!M67854!0001! ! — $33.9M (Department of Defense)
- Viper Tets EO and Rf/Eo Variant — $31.9M (Department of Defense)
- Production Units Seti — $29.8M (Department of Defense)
- 200311!030007!1700!BW24A !naval Undersea Warfare Center, N!N6660403C0007 !A!N! !N! !20030821!20080820!086590841!101939122!275250553!n!racal Instruments Inc !4 Goodyear Street !irvine !ca!92618!36770!059!06!irvine !orange !california!+000002353288!n!n!000000000000!5895!miscellaneous Communication Equipment !c9e!all Other Supplies and Equipme!2000!not Discernable or Classified !334220!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!j!2!001!b! !Z!N!Z! ! !n!b!n!n! ! !Z! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! ! ! !N66604!0001! ! — $21.9M (Department of Defense)
- Contract Dtfawa-05-C-00057, Clin 102 - Papi System Site Spares — $13.9M (Department of Transportation)
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)