DoD's $20.6M contract for aircraft structural component repair awarded to Lear Siegler Services, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,582,567 ($20.6M)

Contractor: URS Federal Services Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-03-12

End Date: 2006-11-06

Contract Duration: 969 days

Daily Burn Rate: $21.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200406!000294!5700!GD15 !OC-ALC/LIDAC !F3460197D0423 !A!N! !N!0122 ! !20040312!20050314!020205527!073871048!175406842!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES, INC !2701 LIBERTY PARKWAY SUITE!MIDWEST CITY !OK!73110!26736!027!48!FORT HOOD !BELL !TEXAS !+000000130000!N!N!000000000000!J015!MAINT & REPAIR OF EQ/AIRCRAFT STRUCTURAL COMPS !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !000 !* !336413!E! !5!B!M! !A! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!Y!2!007!B! !C!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !C!A!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! !Y!2100! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: FORT HOOD, BELL County, TEXAS, 76544

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.6 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC. for work described as: 200406!000294!5700!GD15 !OC-ALC/LIDAC !F3460197D0423 !A!N! !N!0122 ! !20040312!20050314!020205527!073871048!175406842!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES, INC !2701 LIBERTY PARKWAY SUITE!MIDWEST CITY !OK!73110!26736!027!48!FORT HOOD !BELL… Key points: 1. Contract value of $20.6M over 969 days suggests a significant investment in aircraft structural component maintenance. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract's duration and value may present opportunities for sustained revenue for the contractor. 4. Performance context is tied to aircraft structural components, a critical aspect of aviation safety and readiness. 5. Sector positioning within 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' highlights specialized services. 6. The contract's value is substantial, requiring robust oversight to ensure efficient use of taxpayer funds.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $20.6 million over approximately 32 months (969 days) for aircraft structural component repair appears substantial. Benchmarking against similar contracts for specialized maintenance services is difficult without more specific data on the scope of work and required expertise. However, the duration suggests a long-term need. The pricing structure, identified as Time and Materials, can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not carefully managed and monitored, warranting scrutiny of the contractor's efficiency and resource allocation.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple vendors were likely invited to bid. The presence of four bidders (no.) indicates a degree of market interest and competition. A competitive process generally helps in price discovery and can lead to more favorable pricing for the government compared to sole-source awards. However, the specific number of bids received and the range of proposed prices would provide a clearer picture of the competition's intensity.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally beneficial for taxpayers as it promotes a level playing field and encourages competitive pricing, potentially leading to cost savings for the government.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely military aviation units requiring maintenance and repair services for aircraft structural components, ensuring operational readiness. Services delivered include the maintenance and repair of aircraft structural components, crucial for flight safety and longevity. The contract is geographically linked to Fort Hood, Texas, indicating a focus on supporting aviation assets within that region. Workforce implications include the potential for employment opportunities for skilled technicians and mechanics specializing in aircraft structural repair.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials contract type can lead to cost overruns if not closely monitored.
The specific scope of 'repair of equipment/aircraft structural components' needs clear definition to prevent scope creep.
Ensuring the quality and timeliness of repairs is critical for aircraft availability and safety.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive market.
The contract duration of over two years indicates a sustained need and potential for stable service provision.
The contractor, Lear Siegler Services, Inc., has a track record that can be assessed for performance history.

Sector Analysis

The aerospace and defense sector is characterized by high technological demands and stringent quality requirements. Contracts for aircraft maintenance and repair are a significant segment within this sector, supporting the operational readiness of military fleets. Spending in this area is often driven by the need to extend the service life of existing aircraft and maintain high safety standards. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the average cost of similar repair services across different aircraft types and maintenance levels within the Department of Defense.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component (sb: false). While the prime contractor is URS Federal Services Inc., the data does not provide information on subcontracting plans or actual subcontracting to small businesses. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses are involved in the supply chain or as subcontractors for specialized repair services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Air Force contracting and program management offices. The Time and Materials pricing structure necessitates close monitoring of labor hours, material costs, and adherence to the defined scope of work to ensure value for money. Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft Maintenance and Repair
Aerospace Component Manufacturing
Defense Logistics Support
Air Force Equipment Sustainment

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials contract type.
Need for rigorous oversight to ensure efficient labor and material usage.
Clarity of 'structural components' scope is critical to avoid scope creep.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $20.6 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC.. 200406!000294!5700!GD15 !OC-ALC/LIDAC !F3460197D0423 !A!N! !N!0122 ! !20040312!20050314!020205527!073871048!175406842!N!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES, INC !2701 LIBERTY PARKWAY SUITE!MIDWEST CITY !OK!73110!26736!027!48!FORT HOOD !BELL !TEXAS !+000000130000!N!N!000000000000!J015!MAINT & REPAIR OF EQ/AIRCRAFT STRUCTURAL COMPS !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !000 !* !336413!E! !5!B!M! !A! !999

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 Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-03-12. End: 2006-11-06.

What is the track record of Lear Siegler Services, Inc. with similar government contracts, particularly in aircraft structural repair?

Assessing the track record of Lear Siegler Services, Inc. (now part of VT Group) is crucial for understanding their capability and past performance. While this specific contract data doesn't detail their history, government contract databases often contain performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS) for previous awards. A review of these records would reveal their history of on-time delivery, quality of work, cost control, and overall customer satisfaction on similar maintenance and repair contracts. Positive past performance on complex aviation structural repairs would increase confidence in their ability to execute this current contract effectively. Conversely, a history of performance issues could indicate potential risks.

How does the awarded value of $20.6 million compare to the estimated market value for similar aircraft structural component repair services?

The awarded value of $20.6 million for aircraft structural component repair over approximately 32 months (969 days) represents a significant investment. To benchmark this against market value, one would need to compare it with similar contracts awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies for comparable aircraft types and repair scopes. Factors such as the specific aircraft models, the complexity of the structural components, the required turnaround time, and the labor rates in the geographic region all influence pricing. Without access to a detailed breakdown of the work required and specific market data for these types of specialized repairs, a precise comparison is challenging. However, the 'full and open competition' award suggests the price was deemed fair and reasonable through a competitive process.

What are the primary risks associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract for aircraft structural repair, and how are they mitigated?

Time and Materials (T&M) contracts, like the one awarded to Lear Siegler Services, Inc., carry inherent risks, primarily the potential for cost overruns if not managed diligently. The government pays for the actual labor hours and material costs incurred by the contractor, which can escalate if work is inefficiently performed or if the scope is not clearly defined. Mitigation strategies are critical and typically include establishing ceiling prices, requiring detailed record-keeping of labor and materials, implementing robust government oversight to monitor progress and validate costs, and defining clear task orders with specific deliverables. Regular performance reviews and audits are essential to ensure the contractor is performing efficiently and that costs remain within acceptable limits relative to the value delivered.

What is the significance of the 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' NAICS code (336413) in the context of this contract?

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 336413, 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing,' signifies that the contractor is engaged in specialized activities related to the aerospace industry beyond the manufacturing of complete aircraft. In the context of this contract for 'MAINT & REPAIR OF EQ/AIRCRAFT STRUCTURAL COMPS,' this code indicates that Lear Siegler Services, Inc. is providing services that fall under the umbrella of aircraft component support, specifically focusing on the repair and maintenance of structural elements. This classification suggests a need for specialized technical expertise, materials, and processes tailored to the unique demands of aviation structures, differentiating it from general manufacturing or assembly.

How does the geographic location of the contract (Fort Hood, Texas) influence the service delivery and potential costs?

The contract's association with Fort Hood, Texas, suggests that the services provided by Lear Siegler Services, Inc. are intended to support aviation assets stationed at or operating from this military installation. This geographic focus can streamline logistics and reduce transit times for aircraft requiring structural repairs, potentially leading to faster turnaround times and improved operational readiness for the supported units. From a cost perspective, the proximity may reduce travel expenses for personnel and the cost of transporting components. However, labor costs in the Texas region, particularly for specialized technical skills, would be a factor in the overall pricing structure of the Time and Materials contract.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

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

Address: 175 ADMIRAL COCHRANE DR, ANNAPOLIS, MD, 03

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: F3460197D0423

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline