Department of Defense awards $96.4M contract for military armored vehicles, tank, and tank component manufacturing

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $96,387,386 ($96.4M)

Contractor: General Dynamics Land Systems - Force Protection Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-11-09

End Date: 2008-08-10

Contract Duration: 640 days

Daily Burn Rate: $150.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: JERRV 6X6

Place of Performance

Location: LADSON, CHARLESTON County, SOUTH CAROLINA, 29456, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: South Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $96.4 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC. for work described as: JERRV 6X6 Key points: 1. Contract awarded to GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC. for specialized vehicle manufacturing. 2. The contract is for military armored vehicles, tanks, and related components. 3. This award represents a significant investment in the defense sector's vehicle capabilities. 4. The contract duration is 640 days, indicating a focused production or upgrade effort. 5. The fixed-price contract type suggests a defined scope and cost control measures. 6. The award was not competed, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies and market engagement.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to similar sole-source awards. The raw dollar amount of $96.4 million is substantial for specialized vehicle manufacturing. However, the lack of competition prevents a robust assessment of whether this price represents fair market value or if alternative solutions could have been procured at a lower cost. Further analysis would require understanding the specific technological requirements and the unique capabilities of the awarded contractor.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not open to competitive bidding. This approach is typically used when only one contractor possesses the necessary specialized skills, technology, or proprietary information required for the procurement. The lack of competition limits the government's ability to leverage market forces to drive down prices and potentially explore a wider range of innovative solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can lead to higher costs for taxpayers as there is no competitive pressure to ensure the most economical price. It also limits opportunities for other businesses to compete for government contracts.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. military forces requiring advanced armored vehicles for operational readiness. The contract supports the production and delivery of critical defense equipment. The contract is associated with operations in South Carolina, potentially impacting the local workforce and economy. This award contributes to the readiness and technological superiority of the armed forces.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may result in higher costs for taxpayers.
Sole-source awards can limit innovation by not engaging a broader market.
Dependence on a single contractor could pose supply chain risks.

Positive Signals

Ensures acquisition of specialized military hardware critical for national defense.
Direct award to a known entity may expedite delivery of essential equipment.
Fixed-price contract offers some cost certainty for the government.

Sector Analysis

The defense industrial base for armored vehicles is a highly specialized sector characterized by significant research and development, stringent quality control, and long production cycles. This contract falls within the broader category of defense manufacturing, specifically focusing on military vehicles. The market is often dominated by a few large prime contractors due to the high barriers to entry, including capital investment and security clearances. Spending in this area is driven by evolving military requirements and geopolitical considerations.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb: false'. The prime contractor, GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC., is a large entity. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without specific subcontracting goals or reporting, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular award is unclear, though large prime contractors often engage small businesses for component manufacturing or specialized services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Defense's established procurement regulations and contract management processes. Given it's a sole-source award, scrutiny might focus on the justification for non-competition and the reasonableness of the price. The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) would likely be involved in monitoring performance and compliance. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature, but contract award data is publicly available through federal procurement databases.

Related Government Programs

Military Armored Vehicle Manufacturing
Tank Component Manufacturing
Defense Procurement
Department of the Navy Contracts
General Dynamics Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
Potential for higher costs
Limited market engagement

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $96.4 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC.. JERRV 6X6

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $96.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-11-09. End: 2008-08-10.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar military armored vehicles and tank components awarded by the Department of Defense?

Analyzing historical spending for similar military armored vehicles and tank components requires access to comprehensive federal procurement databases. Generally, spending in this category can fluctuate significantly based on geopolitical events, military modernization programs, and specific operational needs. Contracts for such specialized equipment are often large, multi-year awards, and can be subject to sole-source justifications due to the unique capabilities required. Over the past decade, the Department of Defense has consistently invested billions in ground vehicle modernization, including armored personnel carriers, main battle tanks, and their associated components. Specific spending trends would reveal periods of increased investment driven by active conflicts or strategic shifts, and periods of lower investment during budget constraints or when existing fleets are deemed sufficient. Without direct comparative data for this specific contract's scope, it's difficult to pinpoint exact historical parallels, but the overall trend indicates sustained, substantial investment in this area.

What specific type of military armored vehicle or tank component is being procured under this contract?

The contract data indicates the procurement is for 'Military Armored Vehicle, Tank, and Tank Component Manufacturing.' While the specific model or type of vehicle is not detailed in the provided data, the classification suggests it pertains to heavy armored ground combat or transport vehicles. This could encompass components for main battle tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, or specialized support vehicles. The 'Tank Component Manufacturing' aspect implies that the contract might cover the production of critical parts such as engines, transmissions, armor plating, weapon systems integration, or electronic components essential for the operation and survivability of these armored platforms. Further details would typically be found in the contract's statement of work or technical specifications, which are not included in this summary data.

What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The provided data explicitly states the contract type as 'NOT COMPETED,' which is synonymous with a sole-source award. The specific justification for this sole-source determination is not detailed in the summary data. However, common reasons for sole-source procurements in the defense sector include: unique capabilities or proprietary technology held by a single contractor, urgent and compelling needs where competition is not feasible, or when a specific system requires compatibility with existing platforms and only one vendor can provide it. For specialized military vehicles and components, it is often the case that only a limited number of contractors possess the necessary expertise, manufacturing facilities, and security clearances to produce such complex and critical equipment. A formal justification document, often required by federal acquisition regulations, would typically outline the specific rationale and market research conducted to support the sole-source decision.

What is the track record of GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC. with similar Department of Defense contracts?

GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC. (GDLS-FP) has a significant track record with the Department of Defense, particularly in the manufacturing of armored vehicles. They are known for producing vehicles such as the Stryker family of vehicles and MRAPs (Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles). Their history includes numerous large-scale contracts for vehicle production, upgrades, and sustainment. Analyzing their past performance would involve reviewing contract awards, delivery timelines, quality control records, and any past performance evaluations or disputes. Given their established role in this niche market, it is likely they have extensive experience meeting the stringent requirements of the DoD for armored vehicle systems. However, a comprehensive assessment would require a detailed review of their contract history, including any instances of cost overruns, schedule delays, or performance issues on previous similar contracts.

How does the contract duration of 640 days compare to typical production cycles for military armored vehicles?

A contract duration of 640 days (approximately 21 months) for military armored vehicle and tank component manufacturing is within a reasonable range, but can vary significantly based on the scope of work. For the production of entirely new vehicle platforms or major upgrades, production cycles can extend well beyond this timeframe, often spanning several years due to complex design, testing, and manufacturing processes. However, for the production of specific components, a batch order, or a focused upgrade program for an existing fleet, a 640-day duration is quite feasible. It suggests a defined production run or a specific set of manufacturing tasks rather than a long-term development or sustainment contract. Benchmarking against similar contracts would require knowing the exact nature of the deliverables; for instance, producing 50 new vehicles would take longer than manufacturing a specific set of components for 200 existing vehicles.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing › Military Armored Vehicle, Tank, and Tank Component Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: MOTOR VEHICLES, CYCLES, TRAILERS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: General Dynamics Corp (UEI: 001381284)

Address: 9801 HWY 78 STE 3, LADSON, SC, 29456

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $96,713,320

Exercised Options: $96,713,320

Current Obligation: $96,387,386

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: M6785407D5006

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline