Army awards $64.4M contract for vehicle maintenance to Lear Siegler Services Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $64,409,625 ($64.4M)

Contractor: URS Federal Services Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2002-09-27

End Date: 2007-09-29

Contract Duration: 1,828 days

Daily Burn Rate: $35.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200212!000986!2100!KF11 !ARMY ATLANTA CONTRACTING CENTER !DAKF1199D0012 !A!N! !N!0029 !20020927!20030929!073871048!065262573!043271568!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES INC !175 ADMIRAL COCHRANE DRIVE!ANNAPOLIS !MD!21401!31068!029!13!FORT STEWART !BRYAN !GEORGIA !+000000062000!N!N!000000000000!J023!MAINT & REPAIR OF EQ/VEHICLES-TRAILERS-CYCLES !A4A!COMBAT VEHICLES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !811118!E! !5!B!M! !A!A!20020929!B! ! !A! !A!N!U!2!010!B! !C!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !Z!Z!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! !Y! ! !0001!

Place of Performance

Location: GEORGIA, 30330, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $64.4 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC. for work described as: 200212!000986!2100!KF11 !ARMY ATLANTA CONTRACTING CENTER !DAKF1199D0012 !A!N! !N!0029 !20020927!20030929!073871048!065262573!043271568!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES INC !175 ADMIRAL COCHRANE DRIVE!ANNAPOLIS !MD!21401!31068!029!13!FORT STEWART !BRYAN… Key points: 1. The contract value is $64.4 million, awarded on September 27, 2002. 2. The primary contractor is Lear Siegler Services Inc., with URS Federal Services Inc. listed as a competitor. 3. The contract falls under the 'Maintenance & Repair of Equipment/Vehicles' category. 4. This award represents a significant investment in military vehicle readiness for the Department of Defense.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $64.4 million for vehicle maintenance appears reasonable given the duration of over 5 years and the scope of services. Benchmarking against similar large-scale maintenance contracts would provide a more precise assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust price discovery process. This method typically leads to more competitive pricing for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally ensures taxpayers receive the best value by fostering a competitive bidding environment.

Public Impact

Ensures operational readiness of Army vehicles, directly impacting military effectiveness. Supports jobs within the defense contracting sector and potentially local economies where services are performed. The long-term nature of the contract provides stability for the contractor and consistent service for the Army.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Contract duration is extensive (over 5 years), potentially leading to scope creep or price increases if not managed tightly.
Reliance on a single primary contractor for critical maintenance could pose a risk if performance issues arise.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive pricing environment.
Contract aims to ensure the maintenance and repair of essential combat vehicles.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader defense sector, specifically focusing on the maintenance and repair of vehicles and equipment. Spending in this area is crucial for maintaining military readiness and operational capability.

Small Business Impact

The data does not explicitly indicate the involvement of small businesses as subcontractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, indicating oversight from a major federal agency. The 'AWARDED BY DO' field suggests a standard procurement process was followed.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

Contract duration exceeds five years, increasing potential for cost overruns.
Potential for vendor lock-in if performance is satisfactory but alternatives are not explored.
Lack of detailed service breakdown makes precise value assessment difficult.
Small business participation is not explicitly detailed.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $64.4 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC.. 200212!000986!2100!KF11 !ARMY ATLANTA CONTRACTING CENTER !DAKF1199D0012 !A!N! !N!0029 !20020927!20030929!073871048!065262573!043271568!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES INC !175 ADMIRAL COCHRANE DRIVE!ANNAPOLIS !MD!21401!31068!029!13!FORT STEWART !BRYAN !GEORGIA !+000000062000!N!N!000000000000!J023!MAINT & REPAIR OF EQ/VEHICLES-TRAILERS-CYCLES !A4A!COMBAT VEHICLES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !811118!E! !5!B!M! !A!A!20020929!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $64.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-09-27. End: 2007-09-29.

What was the specific breakdown of services included in the 'MAINT & REPAIR OF EQ/VEHICLES-TRAILERS-CYCLES' and how did this scope influence the final price?

The provided data specifies the general category of maintenance and repair for vehicles, trailers, and cycles. A detailed breakdown of specific services, such as routine maintenance, major overhauls, parts replacement, and diagnostic services, would be necessary to fully assess the pricing. Without this granular detail, it's challenging to definitively link the scope to the $64.4 million award, though the extensive duration suggests a comprehensive service agreement.

Given the full and open competition, what were the key differentiators among the bidders that led to Lear Siegler Services Inc. being selected?

While the data confirms full and open competition, it does not detail the evaluation criteria or the specific strengths of each bidder. Typically, selection in such cases is based on a combination of factors including technical approach, past performance, management capability, and price. Lear Siegler Services Inc. likely demonstrated superior performance in one or more of these areas, or offered the most advantageous price-cost balance according to the Army's evaluation framework.

How does the $64.4 million contract value compare to historical spending on similar vehicle maintenance services by the Army, and what does this suggest about efficiency or market changes?

Comparing this $64.4 million contract to historical spending requires access to prior contract data for similar services. If this value is significantly higher or lower than previous contracts of comparable scope and duration, it could indicate changes in market prices for labor and parts, advancements in technology affecting maintenance needs, or shifts in the Army's operational tempo and equipment usage. A trend analysis would reveal whether this represents an increase in cost efficiency or a rise in overall expenditure.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: AECOM Global II, LLC (UEI: 043271568)

Address: 175 ADMIRAL COCHRANE DR, ANNAPOLIS, MD, 21401

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline