DoD's $20.4M contract for KC-135 airframe components awarded to BAE Systems, with 6062 related contracts

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,459,851 ($20.5M)

Contractor: BAE Systems Technology Solutions & Services Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2002-06-05

End Date: 2011-09-01

Contract Duration: 3,375 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200209!000078!5700!GD70 !OC-ALC/LCD (KC135) !F0960301D0209 !A!N! !N!SD03 !20020605!20050605!122525991!122525991!110341133!N!MODERN TECHNOLOGIES CORP !4032 LINDEN AVE !DAYTON !OH!45432!21000!113!39!DAYTON !MONTGOMERY !OHIO !+000017796895!N!N!000000000000!1560!AIRFRAME STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !3ACR!KC-135 STRATOLIFTER !336413!E! !5!B!M! !A!C!20060713!B!D!N!N!Z!A!U!J!2!003!B! !A!N!A! ! !N!B!N!N! ! !A! !A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001!

Place of Performance

Location: ROCKVILLE, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20850

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.5 million to BAE SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS & SERVICES INC. for work described as: 200209!000078!5700!GD70 !OC-ALC/LCD (KC135) !F0960301D0209 !A!N! !N!SD03 !20020605!20050605!122525991!122525991!110341133!N!MODERN TECHNOLOGIES CORP !4032 LINDEN AVE !DAYTON !OH!45432!21000!113!39!DAYTON !MONTG… Key points: 1. Value for money is difficult to assess without detailed cost breakdowns, but the contract value is substantial. 2. Competition dynamics show a high level of engagement with 6,062 related contracts, suggesting a robust market. 3. Risk indicators include the long duration of the contract and the potential for obsolescence in aging aircraft components. 4. Performance context is tied to the operational readiness of the KC-135 fleet, a critical asset for the Air Force. 5. Sector positioning places this contract within the broader aerospace and defense manufacturing industry, specifically focusing on sustainment.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $20.4 million for airframe structural components is significant. Benchmarking against similar contracts for aging aircraft sustainment would be necessary for a precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price nature suggests a degree of cost certainty for the government, but the specific unit costs and their relation to market rates are not detailed in the provided data.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. The data shows 3 bids were received, which is a moderate level of competition for a specialized defense contract. This suggests that while the market is accessible, the number of capable bidders may be limited.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering price discovery and potentially leading to more competitive pricing. However, with only three bidders, the savings might not be as substantial as in markets with broader participation.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Air Force and its KC-135 Stratolifter fleet, ensuring operational readiness. Services delivered include the provision of critical airframe structural components, essential for aircraft maintenance and repair. The geographic impact is national, supporting a key component of the U.S. strategic airlift and refueling capabilities. Workforce implications include supporting jobs in aerospace manufacturing and maintenance, likely concentrated where BAE Systems operates.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen structural issues arise with aging airframes.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical components could lead to supply chain vulnerabilities.
Risk of component obsolescence given the age of the KC-135 aircraft fleet.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process.
Firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
BAE Systems is a well-established defense contractor with significant experience in aerospace.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on aircraft component manufacturing and sustainment. The market for such components is characterized by high barriers to entry due to specialized manufacturing capabilities and stringent quality requirements. The KC-135 fleet is aging, increasing the demand for sustainment and repair parts, making this a critical niche within the broader defense industrial base.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that this was not a small business set-aside, and the prime contractor, BAE Systems, is a large business. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses within this specific award. However, large defense contracts often involve subcontracting opportunities, which could potentially benefit small businesses in the aerospace supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability by capping the government's financial exposure. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases, but detailed performance metrics and cost breakdowns are often considered sensitive.

Related Government Programs

KC-135 Stratolifter Sustainment Programs
Air Force Aircraft Component Procurement
Aerospace Manufacturing and Repair Contracts
Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Parts Procurement

Risk Flags

Aging Aircraft Fleet
Sole Source Potential for Future Modifications
Supply Chain Dependency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $20.5 million to BAE SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS & SERVICES INC.. 200209!000078!5700!GD70 !OC-ALC/LCD (KC135) !F0960301D0209 !A!N! !N!SD03 !20020605!20050605!122525991!122525991!110341133!N!MODERN TECHNOLOGIES CORP !4032 LINDEN AVE !DAYTON !OH!45432!21000!113!39!DAYTON !MONTGOMERY !OHIO !+000017796895!N!N!000000000000!1560!AIRFRAME STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !3ACR!KC-135 STRATOLIFTER !336413!E! !5!B!M! !A!C!20060713!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BAE SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS & SERVICES INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-06-05. End: 2011-09-01.

What is the historical spending trend for airframe structural components for the KC-135 fleet?

Analyzing historical spending for KC-135 airframe structural components requires access to detailed procurement data over multiple fiscal years. While this specific contract represents a $20.4 million award, understanding the broader trend involves examining annual spending patterns, the number and value of similar contracts awarded, and any fluctuations due to fleet modernization efforts or increased operational tempo. Without a longitudinal dataset, it's challenging to identify specific trends. However, given the age of the KC-135, consistent spending on structural components for sustainment is expected, potentially increasing as the fleet ages further and faces greater wear and tear. Fluctuations could also be driven by specific maintenance programs or unforeseen structural issues identified during inspections.

How does the pricing of these airframe components compare to industry benchmarks for similar aircraft?

Benchmarking the pricing of these airframe components against industry standards for similar aircraft is crucial for assessing value for money. This comparison would involve analyzing the unit cost of specific parts (e.g., wing spars, fuselage sections) against prices for comparable components on other aging military aircraft like the C-130 or older fighter jets. Factors such as material costs, manufacturing complexity, required certifications, and the volume of production significantly influence pricing. The provided data does not include specific unit costs or detailed pricing breakdowns, making a direct comparison difficult. However, the firm fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the government has negotiated a set price, but its competitiveness relative to market rates would require further investigation into the specific components and their associated costs.

What is BAE Systems' track record with similar DoD contracts, particularly for aircraft sustainment?

BAE Systems has a substantial track record with the Department of Defense, including numerous contracts related to aircraft sustainment, modification, and component manufacturing. They are a major defense contractor with extensive experience in aerospace systems. For contracts similar to this one, focusing on airframe structural components for aging platforms, BAE Systems has historically demonstrated capability in delivering complex parts and services. Their performance on past contracts, including adherence to schedules, quality standards, and budget, would be a key indicator of their reliability for this award. A review of their contract history, including any past performance evaluations or disputes, would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their suitability and risk profile for this specific requirement.

What are the potential risks associated with relying on a single contractor for critical KC-135 airframe components?

Relying on a single contractor, even one as established as BAE Systems, for critical KC-135 airframe components introduces several potential risks. Firstly, there's a risk of supply chain disruption; if BAE Systems faces production issues, labor strikes, or financial difficulties, the availability of essential parts could be jeopardized, impacting the KC-135 fleet's operational readiness. Secondly, a lack of ongoing competition could lead to price escalation in future contract modifications or renewals, as the government may have fewer alternatives. Thirdly, there's a potential for reduced innovation if the contractor faces less pressure to improve manufacturing processes or develop alternative solutions. Finally, dependence on a single source can weaken the government's negotiating position during future procurements.

How does the $20.4 million contract value compare to the overall budget allocated for KC-135 sustainment?

To assess how the $20.4 million contract value compares to the overall budget for KC-135 sustainment, one would need access to the Air Force's specific budget allocations for the KC-135 program over the relevant period. The KC-135 fleet is one of the oldest in the Air Force inventory, requiring significant and ongoing investment in maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) to maintain operational capability. This $20.4 million award for structural components represents a portion of that larger sustainment effort, which also includes engine maintenance, avionics upgrades, depot-level repairs, and other operational costs. Without the total sustainment budget figures, it's difficult to quantify the exact proportion this contract represents. However, it is likely a significant, but not all-encompassing, component of the overall sustainment expenditure for this critical aircraft.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Aircraft Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT AND STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: BAE Systems PLC (UEI: 217304393)

Address: 520 GAITHER RD, ROCKVILLE, MD, 20850

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Foreign-Owned and U.S.-Incorporated Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: F0960301D0209

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline