DoD's $231M contract for aircraft parts and training aids awarded to Flight Safety Defense Corp

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $231,328,622 ($231.3M)

Contractor: Flightsafety Defense Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-08-10

End Date: 2020-04-04

Contract Duration: 4,986 days

Daily Burn Rate: $46.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200611!000132!5700!FA8223!OO-ALC/PKT/YWK !F3365701D2078 !A!N! !N!QP02 ! !20060810!20070930!105699292!046173175!001024314!N!FLIGHTSAFETY SERVICES CORPORAT!10770 E BRIARWOOD AVE STE !CENTENNIAL !CO!80112!12815!005!08!CENTENNIAL !ARAPAHOE !COLORADO !+000000136501!N!N!000000000000!J069!MAINT&REPAIR OF EQ/TRAINING AIDS&DEVICES !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !336413!E! !5!A!S! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!N!J!2!006!N!3A!C!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !A!Z!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: ENGLEWOOD, ARAPAHOE County, COLORADO, 80112

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $231.3 million to FLIGHTSAFETY DEFENSE CORPORATION for work described as: 200611!000132!5700!FA8223!OO-ALC/PKT/YWK !F3365701D2078 !A!N! !N!QP02 ! !20060810!20070930!105699292!046173175!001024314!N!FLIGHTSAFETY SERVICES CORPORAT!10770 E BRIARWOOD AVE STE !CENTENNIAL !CO!80112!12815!005!08!CENTENNIAL !ARAP… Key points: 1. Contract value of over $231 million for aircraft parts and training aids. 2. Awarded to Flight Safety Defense Corporation, a significant player in defense services. 3. Contract duration spans from August 2006 to April 2020, indicating a long-term need. 4. The contract type is 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources', suggesting a complex procurement process. 5. The primary service involves maintenance and repair of equipment and training devices. 6. The contract falls under the 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' NAICS code. 7. The contract was awarded as a Delivery Order, implying it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery contract.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total contract value of $231,328,621.92 over its duration (August 2006 - April 2020) represents a substantial investment by the Department of Defense. Benchmarking this value is challenging without specific details on the exact services and equipment provided. However, the duration suggests a consistent need for these services. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract indicates that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for value if managed effectively.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources'. This designation implies that while the competition was intended to be broad, certain sources may have been excluded for specific reasons, possibly related to technical qualifications, security, or prior performance. The exact number of bidders is not specified, but the 'full and open' nature suggests multiple entities were considered.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition, even with exclusions, generally aims to achieve competitive pricing. However, the specific exclusion of sources could potentially limit the number of competitive bids received, impacting the ultimate price discovery for taxpayers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Air Force units requiring maintenance and repair of aircraft equipment and training devices. Services delivered include the upkeep and operational readiness of critical training aids and aircraft components. The geographic impact is likely nationwide, supporting Air Force operations across various bases. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for skilled technicians and support staff at Flight Safety Defense Corporation and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'After Exclusion of Sources' clause in the competition type warrants further investigation to understand the rationale and impact on competition.
Lack of specific details on the performance metrics and quality assurance makes it difficult to fully assess value for money.
The long duration of the contract could lead to potential cost inefficiencies if not actively managed and re-competed periodically.

Positive Signals

The contract is firm fixed-price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor and can lead to predictable costs.
Awarded to a known entity, Flight Safety Defense Corporation, suggesting established capabilities.
The contract duration indicates a sustained and critical need for the services provided.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on aircraft parts, maintenance, and training systems. The market for these services is characterized by high technical requirements, stringent quality standards, and long-term relationships between government agencies and specialized contractors. Spending in this area is driven by the need to maintain the operational readiness of military aircraft fleets. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for similar maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) services for military aviation equipment.

Small Business Impact

There is no explicit indication of small business set-asides for this contract. The prime contractor, Flight Safety Defense Corporation, is likely a large business. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may exist, but this would depend on the prime contractor's subcontracting plan and the specific nature of the services required. The overall impact on the small business ecosystem is not directly discernible from the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractors meet their contractual obligations. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract type, which incentivizes performance. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though specific performance details may be limited. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft Maintenance and Repair Services
Defense Training Systems
Aerospace Parts Manufacturing
Military Logistics Support
Air Force Equipment Procurement

Risk Flags

Competition Type Complexity
Long Contract Duration
Lack of Specific Performance Metrics

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $231.3 million to FLIGHTSAFETY DEFENSE CORPORATION. 200611!000132!5700!FA8223!OO-ALC/PKT/YWK !F3365701D2078 !A!N! !N!QP02 ! !20060810!20070930!105699292!046173175!001024314!N!FLIGHTSAFETY SERVICES CORPORAT!10770 E BRIARWOOD AVE STE !CENTENNIAL !CO!80112!12815!005!08!CENTENNIAL !ARAPAHOE !COLORADO !+000000136501!N!N!000000000000!J069!MAINT&REPAIR OF EQ/TRAINING AIDS&DEVICES !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !336413!E! !5!A!S! ! ! !9999090

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FLIGHTSAFETY DEFENSE CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $231.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-08-10. End: 2020-04-04.

What specific types of aircraft equipment and training aids are covered under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract covers 'MAINT&REPAIR OF EQ/TRAINING AIDS&DEVICES' and falls under the 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' NAICS code. While the specific equipment is not detailed, it likely pertains to components and systems essential for flight operations and pilot/crew training. This could include airframe parts, engine components, avionics, simulation devices, and other specialized equipment used by the Air Force. The broad nature of the NAICS code suggests a wide range of potential items, and the 'AIRFRAMES AND SPARES' category further narrows the focus to parts related to the physical structure of aircraft.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar contracts for aircraft maintenance and training aids?

Direct price comparison is difficult without detailed service descriptions and quantities for comparable contracts. However, the contract is 'Firm Fixed Price,' which generally aims for competitive pricing during the bidding phase. The duration of nearly 14 years (August 2006 to April 2020) suggests that the pricing was considered acceptable for a long-term requirement. To perform a robust comparison, one would need to analyze the unit costs for specific parts or labor hours against market rates or other government contracts for similar services, considering factors like inflation, technological advancements, and specific performance requirements.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract for the Department of Defense?

Key risks for the DoD include potential overpricing if competition was not sufficiently robust despite being 'full and open,' contractor performance issues leading to delays or subpar maintenance, and the risk of obsolescence for older equipment or training aids. Given the long duration, there's also a risk that the technology or requirements may evolve, making the contracted services less relevant or requiring costly modifications. Ensuring the contractor maintains adequate technical expertise and supply chain integrity for critical parts is also a significant consideration.

What is the historical spending pattern for this specific contract or similar services?

The provided data shows a total obligated amount of $231,328,621.92 over the contract's life. The contract started in August 2006 and ended in April 2020. Without access to the detailed funding history (e.g., annual obligations), it's hard to discern precise spending patterns year-over-year. However, the total amount suggests a significant and consistent annual expenditure. To understand historical patterns, one would need to examine the funding history of this specific contract and compare it to overall DoD spending on aircraft maintenance and training systems over the same period.

What is the track record of Flight Safety Defense Corporation in fulfilling similar government contracts?

Flight Safety Defense Corporation is the contractor. While the provided data confirms their role in this specific contract, it does not offer details on their broader track record. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their performance on other contracts, including any past performance evaluations, awards, or disputes. Given the substantial value and duration of this contract, it suggests a level of capability and reliability, but further due diligence on their overall performance history with the DoD and other agencies would be prudent.

How does the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' classification impact the effectiveness of competition?

This classification indicates that the competition was intended to be broad, but specific sources were excluded. The effectiveness of competition hinges on the reasons for exclusion and the number of remaining eligible bidders. If the exclusions were justified (e.g., based on highly specialized capabilities or security requirements) and a sufficient number of qualified bidders remained, effective price discovery and value for money could still be achieved. However, if the exclusions significantly limited the pool of potential bidders, it could reduce competitive pressure and potentially lead to higher prices for the government.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (UEI: 001024314)

Address: 10770 E BRIARWOOD AVE STE, CENTENNIAL, CO, 80112

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $231,328,622

Exercised Options: $231,328,622

Current Obligation: $231,328,622

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: F3365701D2078

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline