DoD's $12M contract for WST #1 parts awarded to FlightSafety Defense Corporation

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,076,750 ($12.1M)

Contractor: Flightsafety Defense Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-09-24

End Date: 2013-05-31

Contract Duration: 2,076 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: MC-130H WST #1

Place of Performance

Location: ENGLEWOOD, ARAPAHOE County, COLORADO, 80112

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.1 million to FLIGHTSAFETY DEFENSE CORPORATION for work described as: MC-130H WST #1 Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the duration and nature of aircraft parts. 2. Full and open competition after exclusion of sources suggests a deliberate procurement strategy. 3. The contract's duration of over 2000 days indicates a long-term need for these parts. 4. Awarded to a single vendor, highlighting potential reliance on specialized capabilities. 5. The fixed-price contract type aims to control costs for the government. 6. This contract falls under the 'Other Aircraft Parts' manufacturing sector.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $12,076,750 for MC-130H WST #1 parts over approximately 5.7 years suggests a moderate annual expenditure. Benchmarking against similar specialized aircraft parts contracts is challenging without more specific data on the components. However, the fixed-price nature of the contract provides cost certainty for the Department of Defense. The number of bids received (6) indicates a degree of market interest, which can contribute to fair pricing.

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,' indicating that while the competition was open, specific sources were initially excluded, possibly due to pre-qualification or specialized requirements. Six bids were received, suggesting a competitive landscape for these specific aircraft parts. This level of competition is generally positive for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of this award, despite initial source exclusions, likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source procurement. The presence of multiple bidders helps drive down costs and ensures a wider pool of potential suppliers is considered.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Air Force units operating MC-130H aircraft, ensuring operational readiness. The contract delivers essential aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment, crucial for maintaining the fleet's airworthiness. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, supporting defense operations and maintenance activities. Workforce implications include skilled labor in manufacturing, quality control, and logistics within the aerospace sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for limited competition if the excluded sources were critical for a broader range of suppliers.
Dependence on a single contractor for specialized parts could lead to future pricing vulnerabilities.
The long contract duration might not fully account for rapid technological advancements in aircraft parts.

Positive Signals

The 'Full and Open Competition' aspect, even with exclusions, suggests an effort to maximize supplier options.
The fixed-price contract type offers predictable costs for the government.
Awarding to a firm with 'DEFENSE CORPORATION' in its name suggests relevant industry experience.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader aerospace and defense manufacturing sector, specifically focusing on aircraft parts. The market for specialized aircraft components is often characterized by high barriers to entry due to stringent quality and certification requirements. Spending in this area is critical for maintaining aging military fleets and ensuring national security. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend on the specific part numbers and their complexity, but contracts for such components can range from thousands to millions of dollars.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. This suggests that the primary award went to a larger entity, and the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this specific contract may be limited unless FlightSafety Defense Corporation actively engages small businesses in its supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Air Force's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. Transparency is facilitated by the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS), where contract awards are recorded. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

MC-130H Aircraft Sustainment
Aerospace Parts Manufacturing
Department of Defense Aircraft Procurement
Air Mobility Command Logistics

Risk Flags

Potential for limited competition due to source exclusion.
Long contract duration may introduce risks of price escalation or obsolescence.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical parts.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.1 million to FLIGHTSAFETY DEFENSE CORPORATION. MC-130H WST #1

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FLIGHTSAFETY DEFENSE CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-09-24. End: 2013-05-31.

What is the specific nature of the 'WST #1' components being procured, and why are they critical for the MC-130H aircraft?

The 'WST #1' likely refers to a specific system or component group for the MC-130H Combat Talon I aircraft, a specialized variant of the C-130 used for special operations missions. Without access to the detailed contract line item numbers (CLINs) or product service codes (PSCs), the exact nature of 'WST #1' remains unspecified in the summary data. However, given the MC-130H's role, these parts are likely critical for its unique mission systems, such as electronic warfare, terrain-following radar, or specialized communication equipment. Their criticality stems from the need to maintain the operational readiness and unique capabilities of these high-value, low-production aircraft, which are essential for specific national security missions. The failure of such components could ground the aircraft or compromise its mission effectiveness.

How does the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' procurement method impact cost and availability compared to standard full and open competition?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' (F&O CAES) method is a variation of full and open competition where the agency initially excludes certain sources from consideration before opening the solicitation to all others. This can occur if the agency determines that only specific types of contractors or those meeting certain pre-qualification criteria can meet the requirement. While it still aims for broad competition among eligible entities, the initial exclusion can limit the pool of potential bidders. This might slightly reduce the competitive pressure compared to a truly unrestricted full and open competition if the excluded sources represented significant market players. However, if the exclusions are justified by technical requirements or specialized capabilities, it can ensure that only qualified vendors participate, potentially leading to better technical solutions. The impact on cost is nuanced; it could be slightly higher than unrestricted competition if fewer bidders emerge, but it could also be competitive if the eligible pool remains robust and the exclusions were necessary for technical reasons.

What is the historical spending trend for MC-130H WST #1 parts or similar components from the Department of Defense?

Analyzing historical spending trends for 'MC-130H WST #1' specifically is challenging with the provided summary data, as it only captures this single contract award. To understand historical spending, one would need to query the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) for all contracts related to MC-130H parts, potentially filtering by Product Service Code (PSC) or North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code (like 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing'). This would reveal the total amount spent over previous fiscal years, identify other contractors involved, and show the frequency and value of similar procurements. Without this broader dataset, we can only infer that spending on such parts is likely consistent as long as the MC-130H fleet remains operational and requires maintenance. Fluctuations might occur based on fleet readiness, upgrade programs, or the availability of parts from the original equipment manufacturer versus aftermarket suppliers.

What are the potential risks associated with a long-duration contract (2076 days) for specialized aircraft parts?

Long-duration contracts for specialized aircraft parts, like this 2076-day award, present several potential risks. Firstly, price escalation is a concern; while this is a fixed-price contract, unforeseen increases in raw material costs, labor, or supply chain disruptions over nearly six years could strain the contractor's margins or lead to requests for equitable adjustments if contract terms allow. Secondly, technological obsolescence is a risk; advancements in materials science or manufacturing techniques could render the specified parts outdated or less efficient during the contract's life, potentially requiring costly modifications or replacements. Thirdly, contractor performance degradation is possible; over an extended period, a contractor's focus might shift, quality control could slip, or key personnel might leave, impacting delivery schedules or product quality. Finally, market shifts could occur, potentially making alternative, more cost-effective solutions available elsewhere, but the government would be locked into the current contract.

How does the contractor, FlightSafety Defense Corporation, perform on other government contracts, and does this award align with their typical contract profile?

FlightSafety Defense Corporation, as indicated by its name, likely specializes in defense-related training, simulation, and potentially parts or services. To assess their performance, a review of their contract history within the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) would be necessary. This would involve examining past awards, their values, contract types, agencies involved, and any performance ratings or past performance questionnaires (PPQs) associated with them. This specific $12M contract for aircraft parts appears to align with a defense contractor's profile, suggesting they may have capabilities in supplying or supporting military hardware. Without access to their detailed performance record, it's difficult to definitively state if this award is typical, but it falls within the expected scope of a company operating in the defense sector. A deeper dive would reveal their track record in terms of on-time delivery, quality, and adherence to contract terms across their portfolio.

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

Offers Received: 6

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, 06

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,076,750

Exercised Options: $12,076,750

Current Obligation: $12,076,750

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: F3365701D2078

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline