Symetrics Industries awarded $13.3M for communications equipment, with limited competition and no small business set-aside

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,267,628 ($13.3M)

Contractor: Symetrics Industries, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-08-30

End Date: 2010-07-31

Contract Duration: 1,066 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.4K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE REDETERMINATION

Sector: Other

Official Description: PROCUREMENT OF IDM-304S TO SUPPORT AH-64D, UH-60M, CH-47F, AND ARH-70A

Place of Performance

Location: MELBOURNE, BREVARD County, FLORIDA, 32901

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.3 million to SYMETRICS INDUSTRIES, LLC for work described as: PROCUREMENT OF IDM-304S TO SUPPORT AH-64D, UH-60M, CH-47F, AND ARH-70A Key points: 1. Contract awarded for critical communications equipment supporting multiple aircraft platforms. 2. Sole-source award raises questions about price discovery and potential for overpayment. 3. Lack of competition may limit opportunities for innovative solutions and cost savings. 4. Contract duration of nearly three years suggests a sustained need for these components. 5. Geographic concentration in Florida for the contractor warrants further investigation. 6. No small business participation noted, potentially excluding a significant segment of the industrial base.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $13.3 million for communications equipment is difficult to benchmark without specific unit cost data. Given the sole-source nature of the award, it is challenging to assess whether Symetrics Industries provided competitive pricing. The absence of comparative contract data or market research makes a definitive value-for-money assessment problematic. Further analysis would be needed to determine if the price reflects fair market value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one vendor, Symetrics Industries, LLC, was solicited. This approach bypasses the standard competitive bidding process, which typically involves multiple vendors submitting proposals. While sole-source awards can be justified under specific circumstances (e.g., unique capabilities, urgent needs), they inherently limit price discovery and can lead to higher costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers may not benefit from the cost savings that typically arise from a competitive bidding environment. The government may have paid a premium due to the lack of competing offers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army aviation units relying on the AH-64D, UH-60M, CH-47F, and ARH-70A aircraft. The contract delivers essential communications equipment, crucial for maintaining operational readiness and mission effectiveness. The geographic impact is primarily felt by the contractor located in Florida, but the equipment supports national defense operations. Workforce implications include employment at Symetrics Industries, LLC, and potentially its suppliers, supporting specialized manufacturing roles.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pressure, potentially inflating costs.
Lack of small business participation means missed opportunities for economic inclusion.
Fixed Price Redetermination contract type can introduce cost uncertainty if not managed closely.
Contract awarded in 2007, with performance extending into 2010, may not reflect current market prices or technological advancements.

Positive Signals

Contract supports critical aviation platforms, ensuring operational capability.
Symetrics Industries, LLC is a provider of specialized communications equipment.
The contract was awarded to meet a specific need for the Department of the Army.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing sector, a segment of the broader defense industrial base. The market for specialized military communications equipment is often characterized by high barriers to entry due to stringent technical requirements and security protocols. While specific market size data for IDM-304S is not readily available, the Department of Defense represents a significant customer for such niche manufacturing capabilities. This contract represents a specific procurement within a larger ecosystem of defense electronics suppliers.

Small Business Impact

This contract did not include any small business set-aside provisions, nor is there any indication of subcontracting to small businesses. This means that opportunities for small businesses to participate in this procurement were not actively pursued. The absence of small business involvement in this specific contract suggests a potential gap in leveraging the capabilities of the small business industrial base for this particular requirement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be tied to the terms of the Fixed Price Redetermination contract, requiring adherence to specifications and delivery schedules. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature and the lack of publicly available detailed performance metrics. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Communications Equipment Procurements
Army Aviation Support Contracts
Specialized Electronic Manufacturing Contracts
Sole-Source Defense Procurements

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive justification.
No small business participation noted.
Fixed Price Redetermination contract type introduces cost uncertainty.
Limited public data on performance and value.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.3 million to SYMETRICS INDUSTRIES, LLC. PROCUREMENT OF IDM-304S TO SUPPORT AH-64D, UH-60M, CH-47F, AND ARH-70A

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SYMETRICS INDUSTRIES, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $13.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-08-30. End: 2010-07-31.

What is the track record of Symetrics Industries, LLC in fulfilling defense contracts, particularly sole-source awards?

Assessing Symetrics Industries, LLC's track record requires a deeper dive into their contract history beyond this single award. Information on past performance, including on-time delivery, quality of products, and adherence to budget, is crucial. For sole-source contracts, the government often relies on past performance with that specific contractor to justify the lack of competition. Without access to performance reports or a broader contract database, it's difficult to definitively state their overall reliability. However, the fact that they were awarded this sole-source contract suggests they were identified as the only capable source at the time, potentially based on prior successful engagements or unique qualifications.

How does the $13.3 million contract value compare to similar procurements for communications equipment for these aircraft platforms?

Direct comparison of the $13.3 million contract value is challenging without specific details on the quantity and type of IDM-304S units procured, as well as the contract's duration (nearly three years). However, given this was a sole-source award for communications equipment supporting multiple major Army aircraft (AH-64D, UH-60M, CH-47F, ARH-70A), the value appears substantial. Typically, sole-source contracts may command higher prices than competitively bid ones. Benchmarking would ideally involve comparing unit costs against similar systems procured competitively or against industry standards for comparable communication modules, which is not publicly available for this specific contract.

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for critical communications equipment?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for critical communications equipment include potential overpayment due to lack of price competition, reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or improve efficiency, and a potential lack of redundancy if the sole provider faces production issues or goes out of business. Taxpayers bear the risk of not achieving the best possible value. Furthermore, reliance on a single source can create vulnerabilities in the supply chain. The government's ability to negotiate favorable terms is also diminished without the leverage that multiple bidders provide.

What was the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis instead of through full and open competition?

The specific justification for this sole-source award is not detailed in the provided data. Typically, sole-source procurements are justified under specific circumstances outlined in federal acquisition regulations, such as when only one responsible source is available, or when there is a compelling urgency that precludes full competition. Other justifications can include follow-on work to a previously competed contract where only the original contractor possesses the necessary knowledge or tooling. Without the official justification document (e.g., a Justification and Approval - J&A), it is impossible to determine the precise rationale used by the Department of the Army.

What is the historical spending trend for communications equipment for Army aviation platforms like the AH-64D, UH-60M, CH-47F, and ARH-70A?

Analyzing historical spending trends for communications equipment across these specific Army aviation platforms (AH-64D, UH-60M, CH-47F, ARH-70A) would require access to extensive historical procurement data. This contract, valued at $13.3 million and awarded in 2007, represents a snapshot of spending during that period. To understand trends, one would need to examine spending patterns for similar equipment over several years, identify major procurement cycles, and note any shifts in technology or platform upgrades that influenced spending. Factors like sustainment, modernization programs, and new platform introductions would all contribute to the overall historical expenditure.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Communications Equipment Manufacturing › Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE REDETERMINATION (A)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1615 W NASA BLVD, MELBOURNE, FL, 08

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $13,267,628

Exercised Options: $13,267,628

Current Obligation: $13,267,628

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline