DoD's $21M non-standard weapons contract awarded to Alliant Techsystems Operations LLC shows fair value with 6 bidders

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $21,078,675 ($21.1M)

Contractor: Alliant Techsystems Operations LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-09-25

End Date: 2010-10-31

Contract Duration: 401 days

Daily Burn Rate: $52.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: NON-STANDARD WEAPONS - FMS

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $21.1 million to ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS OPERATIONS LLC for work described as: NON-STANDARD WEAPONS - FMS Key points: 1. Contract value of $21.1M for non-standard weapons appears reasonable given the competitive nature of the award. 2. The award was made under full and open competition, indicating a robust market for these specialized items. 3. A total of 6 bids were received, suggesting adequate supplier interest and potential for price discovery. 4. The contract duration of approximately 13 months is relatively short, potentially limiting long-term price fluctuations. 5. The firm-fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor, which is generally favorable for the government. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 332994 covers a niche manufacturing sector.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $21.1 million for non-standard weapons appears to be within a reasonable range, especially considering it was awarded through full and open competition with six bidders. While specific per-unit cost data is not provided, the competitive landscape suggests that pricing was likely scrutinized. Benchmarking against similar contracts for specialized ordnance would provide a more precise value assessment, but the presence of multiple bids indicates a degree of market validation.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. Six bids were received, indicating a healthy level of interest from the market for these non-standard weapons. This level of competition is generally positive as it allows for a wider range of pricing and technical solutions to be considered, potentially leading to better value for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition with multiple bidders suggests that taxpayer dollars were likely used efficiently, as the government had the opportunity to select the most cost-effective and technically suitable offer.

Public Impact

The Department of the Army benefits from the acquisition of specialized non-standard weapons to meet specific operational needs. This contract supports the delivery of ordnance and related accessories, crucial for military readiness. The geographic impact is primarily within the defense supply chain, potentially involving manufacturing facilities across the US. Workforce implications include skilled labor in manufacturing, engineering, and quality control within the defense industrial base.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific performance metrics or quality assurance details in the provided data.
Potential for cost overruns if 'non-standard' implies unique or difficult-to-source components without clear cost controls.
Limited contract duration may necessitate future competitive procurements, increasing administrative burden.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract type minimizes cost risk for the government.
Full and open competition with multiple bidders suggests a competitive market and potential for good pricing.
Award to a known entity (Alliant Techsystems) may indicate a level of trust in their capability.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the defense manufacturing sector, specifically focusing on ordnance and accessories. The market for such specialized items is often characterized by a limited number of highly capable manufacturers due to stringent quality and security requirements. Spending in this area is driven by military modernization, operational demands, and the need for specialized equipment not covered by standard issue. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within the broader defense procurement data for weapons systems and ammunition.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false) and does not specify any small business subcontracting goals (st: ''). This suggests that the primary award went to a large business, and there is no explicit information on how small businesses might participate in the supply chain for this specific contract. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Department of Defense contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and program management office within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified goods at an agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific performance details might be sensitive. The Inspector General's office within the DoD would have jurisdiction for investigating fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Procurement
Ordnance and Ammunition Manufacturing
Small Arms Manufacturing
Foreign Military Sales (FMS) related procurements
Defense Industrial Base Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep if 'non-standard' requirements are not clearly defined.
Reliance on specific suppliers for unique components could pose a supply chain risk.
Contract duration is short, requiring potential future procurements and associated administrative costs.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $21.1 million to ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS OPERATIONS LLC. NON-STANDARD WEAPONS - FMS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS OPERATIONS 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 $21.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-09-25. End: 2010-10-31.

What is the specific nature of the 'non-standard weapons' procured under this contract?

The term 'non-standard weapons' typically refers to armaments that deviate from the typical or officially issued equipment of a military force. This could encompass a wide range of items, including specialized firearms, improvised explosive device (IED) countermeasures, unique ammunition types, or systems adapted for specific mission profiles or foreign military requirements. Without further details from the contract's statement of work or technical specifications, it is difficult to pinpoint the exact nature of these weapons. However, the NAICS code 332994 (All Other Miscellaneous Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing) and the mention of 'Ordnance Accessories' suggest a focus on components or specialized manufactured items rather than complete, complex weapon systems. The contract's origin as 'NON-STANDARD WEAPONS - FMS' indicates these items may be intended for foreign military sales, further implying a need for equipment tailored to specific allied nation requirements or capabilities.

How does the $21.1 million contract value compare to similar procurements for ordnance and accessories?

Directly comparing the $21.1 million contract value to similar procurements is challenging without access to a comprehensive database of classified or specialized defense contracts. However, the value appears moderate for a Department of Defense contract, especially considering it was awarded under full and open competition with six bidders. The duration of approximately 13 months (September 2009 to October 2010) suggests a focused effort rather than a long-term sustainment program. The firm-fixed-price (FFP) nature of the contract implies that the price was set upfront, and the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns. Given these factors, the $21.1 million figure seems plausible for a batch of specialized ordnance and accessories, particularly if it involves custom manufacturing or sourcing of non-standard components. A more precise benchmark would require analyzing contracts with identical or highly similar NAICS codes and product descriptions, which are often not publicly detailed.

What are the key risks associated with this contract, and how were they mitigated?

Key risks associated with this contract likely include potential technical obsolescence of 'non-standard' items, supply chain disruptions for specialized components, and ensuring the quality and reliability of ordnance. The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract structure is a primary mitigation strategy, as it places the financial risk of cost overruns on the contractor, Alliant Techsystems Operations LLC. The award under full and open competition with six bidders also mitigates risk by ensuring a competitive market, which theoretically drives down prices and encourages the selection of capable suppliers. The relatively short contract duration (approx. 13 months) might also be seen as a risk mitigation tool, allowing the government to reassess needs and re-compete requirements if the technology or operational environment changes rapidly. However, the lack of detailed performance metrics in the provided summary makes it difficult to assess specific quality assurance risks and their mitigation.

What is the track record of Alliant Techsystems Operations LLC in fulfilling similar defense contracts?

Alliant Techsystems Operations LLC (now part of Northrop Grumman) has a long and extensive track record of fulfilling defense contracts, particularly in areas related to munitions, aerospace components, and advanced materials. They are a major defense contractor with significant experience in manufacturing and supplying a wide array of products to the U.S. military and allied nations. Their portfolio often includes ordnance, propulsion systems, and integrated electronic warfare systems. Given their established presence and capabilities, the award of this contract for non-standard weapons and ordnance accessories to Alliant Techsystems suggests a confidence in their ability to meet the technical specifications and delivery requirements. Their history likely includes numerous FFP contracts, demonstrating experience in managing cost and performance risks inherent in such agreements.

How does the competition level (6 bidders) impact the value for taxpayers?

A competition level of six bidders for this $21.1 million contract is generally considered robust and positively impacts value for taxpayers. Higher numbers of bidders typically lead to more competitive pricing as companies vie for the award. This increased competition forces contractors to offer their best prices and most efficient solutions to win the contract. It also enhances the government's ability to negotiate favorable terms and ensures that the selected contractor is likely to be one of the most capable and cost-effective providers in the market. For taxpayers, this means their money is more likely to be spent efficiently, securing necessary defense articles at a price that reflects market realities rather than being inflated due to a lack of viable alternatives.

What are the implications of the 'NON-STANDARD WEAPONS - FMS' designation for this contract?

The 'NON-STANDARD WEAPONS - FMS' designation signifies that this contract is intended to procure weapons or ordnance that are not part of the standard U.S. military inventory, and the ultimate end-user is likely a foreign ally through the U.S. Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program. This has several implications. Firstly, it suggests the procured items are tailored to the specific requirements, doctrines, or existing equipment of a partner nation. Secondly, it means the contract must adhere to FMS regulations and procedures, which can sometimes involve additional administrative steps and oversight. Thirdly, it implies that the items might be less common or require specialized manufacturing capabilities, potentially influencing the cost and the pool of eligible contractors. The FMS designation underscores the strategic importance of supporting allied defense capabilities while ensuring U.S. government oversight of the transaction.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing › Small Arms, Ordnance, and Ordnance Accessories Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: WEAPONS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W91CRB09R0025

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems LLC (UEI: 618705925)

Address: HWY 7 & 78 LAKE CITY ARMY AMUNITION PLANT, INDEPENDENCE, MO, 05

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Federally Funded Research and Development Corp, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $21,078,675

Exercised Options: $21,078,675

Current Obligation: $21,078,675

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline