DoD's $32.2M Sikorsky Aircraft Contract for Aircraft Parts Lacked Competition, Awarded in 2008

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $32,224,148 ($32.2M)

Contractor: Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-09-22

End Date: 2014-12-30

Contract Duration: 2,290 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: NOUNS INCLUDE: AIR INTAKE, TURBINE; DRIVE SHAFT ASSEMBLY; SPINDLE HEAD ROTARY; SWASHPLATE CONTROL; LEFT HAND STABILATOR; RIGHT HAND STABILATOR; PUSH SWITCH; JUNCTION BOX ASSEMBLY; CABLE ASSEMBLY, SPECIAL; AIRCRAFT TIP; FUSE COVER; CONVERTER, SIGNAL DA; DISPLAY UNIT; CENTER STABILATOR

Place of Performance

Location: STRATFORD, FAIRFIELD County, CONNECTICUT, 06614

State: Connecticut Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $32.2 million to SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION for work described as: NOUNS INCLUDE: AIR INTAKE, TURBINE; DRIVE SHAFT ASSEMBLY; SPINDLE HEAD ROTARY; SWASHPLATE CONTROL; LEFT HAND STABILATOR; RIGHT HAND STABILATOR; PUSH SWITCH; JUNCTION BOX ASSEMBLY; CABLE ASSEMBLY, SPECIAL; AIRCRAFT TIP; FUSE COVER; CONVERTER, SIGNAL DA; DISPLAY UNIT; CENTER STABIL… Key points: 1. The contract awarded to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation for various aircraft parts, including critical components like swashplate controls and stabilators, totaled $32.2 million. 2. This contract was not competed, raising concerns about potential overpayment and the lack of market price discovery. 3. The duration of the contract, from 2008 to 2014, suggests a long-term need for these specialized aircraft parts. 4. The sector is 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing', indicating a niche but essential area of defense procurement.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value of $32.2 million for specialized aircraft parts is difficult to assess without competitive benchmarks. The lack of competition suggests potential for inflated pricing compared to what might have been achieved in a more open market.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

The contract was explicitly 'NOT COMPETED', indicating a sole-source award to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation. This significantly limits price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition likely resulted in taxpayers paying a premium for these aircraft parts, as there was no market pressure to drive down prices.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may have overpaid for critical aircraft components due to the lack of competitive bidding. The long contract duration (7 years) means the impact of non-competitive pricing was sustained over a significant period. Reliance on a single supplier for specialized parts can create long-term dependency and potential supply chain vulnerabilities. The Department of the Army procured these parts, highlighting the importance of aviation readiness for ground forces.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of Competition
Potential for Overpricing
Long Contract Duration

Positive Signals

Awarded to established manufacturer (Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation)
Specific, specialized parts procured

Sector Analysis

The 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' sector is crucial for maintaining military aviation fleets. Spending benchmarks are hard to establish for highly specialized, non-competed components, but typical government procurement aims for competitive pricing to ensure value for money.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that small businesses were involved in this contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors. The award was made directly to a large corporation, Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation.

Oversight & Accountability

The 'NOT COMPETED' status suggests that standard competitive oversight processes may have been bypassed. Further review would be needed to understand the justification for this sole-source award and any internal oversight applied.

Related Government Programs

Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Potential for Price Inflation
Sole-Source Award
Long Contract Duration (2008-2014)
Limited Transparency on Justification

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $32.2 million to SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION. NOUNS INCLUDE: AIR INTAKE, TURBINE; DRIVE SHAFT ASSEMBLY; SPINDLE HEAD ROTARY; SWASHPLATE CONTROL; LEFT HAND STABILATOR; RIGHT HAND STABILATOR; PUSH SWITCH; JUNCTION BOX ASSEMBLY; CABLE ASSEMBLY, SPECIAL; AIRCRAFT TIP; FUSE COVER; CONVERTER, SIGNAL DA; DISPLAY UNIT; CENTER STABILATOR

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $32.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-09-22. End: 2014-12-30.

What was the specific justification provided for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, and were alternative sourcing options explored?

The provided data states the contract was 'NOT COMPETED'. A comprehensive review would require accessing the contract file to determine the official justification, such as a critical need, lack of qualified sources, or specific technical requirements that only Sikorsky could meet. Without this justification, it's impossible to fully assess if alternative sourcing was adequately explored or if the sole-source decision was appropriate.

How does the final contract price of $32.2 million compare to estimated market prices for similar specialized aircraft components, considering the lack of competition?

Direct comparison is challenging due to the 'NOT COMPETED' status and the specialized nature of the parts (e.g., swashplate control, stabilators). However, the absence of competition inherently removes market pressures that typically drive prices down. It is highly probable that the government paid a premium compared to what could have been achieved through a competitive bidding process, potentially by tens of percent.

What is the long-term risk associated with procuring specialized aircraft parts like these through non-competitive contracts, particularly regarding technological obsolescence and future support?

Procuring specialized parts non-competitively carries risks of technological obsolescence if the sole-source provider's technology stagnates. It also creates long-term dependency, potentially limiting future upgrades or alternative support options. This can lead to higher sustainment costs over the lifecycle of the aircraft and reduced flexibility in adapting to new technologies or market changes.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT COMPONENTS AND ACCESSORIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: W58RGZ08R0543

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Lockheed Martin Corp (UEI: 834951691)

Address: 6900 MAIN ST, STRATFORD, CT, 06614

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $32,224,148

Exercised Options: $32,224,148

Current Obligation: $32,224,148

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline