DoD's $61.9M contract for aircraft parts and maintenance saw significant cost growth over its 7-year duration

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $61,898,254 ($61.9M)

Contractor: URS Federal Services Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 1999-06-20

End Date: 2006-09-14

Contract Duration: 2,643 days

Daily Burn Rate: $23.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 199909!5700!0280!GD15 !OC-ALC/LIDIC !F3460197D0423 !A!*!0130 !19990620!19990930!020205527!073871048!175406842!N!2AAC5!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES, INC. !3100 S I 35 !OKLAHOMA CITY !OK!73129!55000!017!40!OKLAHOMA CITY !CANADIAN !OKLAHOMA !0001!+000000193650!N!N!000000000000!J023!MAINT & REPAIR OF EQ/VEHICLES-TRAILERS-CYCLES !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !3000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !3728!5!B!S!C!B!A!*!A !U!Y!2!007!B!* !C!Y!Z!* !* !N!C!*!C!A!A!A!A!*!* !*!N!A!C!N!*!*!*!*!*!

Place of Performance

Location: FAYETTEVILLE, CUMBERLAND County, NORTH CAROLINA, 28302

State: North Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $61.9 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC. for work described as: 199909!5700!0280!GD15 !OC-ALC/LIDIC !F3460197D0423 !A!*!0130 !19990620!19990930!020205527!073871048!175406842!N!2AAC5!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES, INC. !3100 S I 35 !OKLAHOMA CITY !OK!73129!55000!017!40!OKLAHOMA CITY !CANADI… Key points: 1. The contract experienced a substantial increase in total value from its initial award, indicating potential scope creep or underestimation. 2. Competition was robust, with a full and open process suggesting a competitive market for these services. 3. The contractor has a long history with the government, but specific performance metrics beyond cost are not detailed here. 4. The contract's duration of over 7 years allowed for extended performance but also increased the risk of cost overruns. 5. This contract falls within the 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' NAICS code, a specialized sector. 6. The contract was awarded as a Time and Materials type, which can be prone to cost escalation if not closely managed.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The total value of $61.9 million over approximately 7 years represents a significant investment. While the initial award amount is not provided, the final value suggests substantial growth. Benchmarking this against similar contracts for aircraft parts and maintenance is difficult without more granular data on the specific parts and services rendered. However, the significant increase in obligated funds over the contract's life warrants scrutiny regarding cost control and potential inefficiencies.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under a 'full and open competition' designation, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. The presence of 7 bids suggests a healthy level of competition for this requirement. This competitive environment should theoretically drive down prices and ensure fair market value for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process generally benefits taxpayers by ensuring that the government is not overpaying for goods and services, and that the most cost-effective solutions are considered.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are entities within the Department of Defense, specifically the Air Force, receiving essential aircraft parts and maintenance. Services delivered include the maintenance and repair of aircraft equipment, trailers, and cycles, crucial for operational readiness. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around Air Force bases and facilities where the contractor, Lear Siegler Services, Inc., operated. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for skilled technicians and support staff involved in aircraft maintenance and parts manufacturing/distribution.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Significant cost growth from initial award to final value suggests potential issues with cost estimation, scope management, or contractor performance.
The Time and Materials contract type carries inherent risk of cost escalation if not rigorously monitored and controlled.
Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the true value-for-money beyond the final obligated amount.
The extended duration of the contract increases the potential for unforeseen costs and market fluctuations impacting the price.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process and potential for competitive pricing.
Multiple bidders (7) participated, suggesting a competitive market for these types of services.
The contractor, Lear Siegler Services, Inc., has a long-standing presence, potentially indicating established expertise and reliability.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the 'Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing' sector (NAICS 336413). This industry is critical to national defense and aerospace, involving the production and maintenance of components essential for aircraft operation. The market size for defense-related aerospace manufacturing and maintenance is substantial, driven by government procurement. This contract represents a portion of the broader defense spending allocated to sustain and modernize Air Force fleets.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (SB is 'N'). There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans or performance. Without a small business set-aside, the primary contractor, Lear Siegler Services, Inc., likely handled the majority of the work, with potential for subcontracting to other large or small businesses depending on the specific needs and the terms of the contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the Department of the Air Force contracting officers and administrative contracting officers. The Time and Materials nature of the contract necessitates close monitoring of labor hours, material costs, and adherence to the scope of work to prevent overruns. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, but detailed performance reports and audits are often internal or classified. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft Maintenance and Repair Services
Aerospace Parts Manufacturing
Defense Logistics Support
Air Force Procurement
Time and Materials Contracts
Government Contracting

Risk Flags

Cost Growth
Time and Materials Contract Risk
Extended Performance Period
Lack of Detailed Performance Data

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $61.9 million to URS FEDERAL SERVICES INC.. 199909!5700!0280!GD15 !OC-ALC/LIDIC !F3460197D0423 !A!*!0130 !19990620!19990930!020205527!073871048!175406842!N!2AAC5!LEAR SIEGLER SERVICES, INC. !3100 S I 35 !OKLAHOMA CITY !OK!73129!55000!017!40!OKLAHOMA CITY !CANADIAN !OKLAHOMA !0001!+000000193650!N!N!000000000000!J023!MAINT & REPAIR OF EQ/VEHICLES-TRAILERS-CYCLES !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !3000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !3728!5!B!S!C!B!A!*!A !U!Y!2!0

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 $61.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1999-06-20. End: 2006-09-14.

What was the initial award amount for this contract, and how did the final obligated amount compare?

The provided data does not explicitly state the initial award amount. However, the final obligated amount reached $61,898,254.38. The duration of the contract was from June 20, 1999, to September 14, 2006 (approximately 7.25 years). Without the initial figure, it's impossible to quantify the exact percentage or dollar increase, but the final value represents the total spending over the contract's life. This significant sum suggests either a large initial scope or substantial growth in requirements or costs over time.

What specific types of aircraft equipment, vehicles, or cycles were maintained or repaired under this contract?

The contract description specifies 'MAINT & REPAIR OF EQ/VEHICLES-TRAILERS-CYCLES' and lists the Product Service Code (PSC) as '3345' (Aircraft maintenance and repair shop specialized equipment) and the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code as '336413' (Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing). While the general categories are provided, the specific types of aircraft, vehicles, trailers, or cycles are not detailed in the summary data. This level of detail would typically be found in the contract's statement of work (SOW).

How did the contractor's performance on this contract compare to industry benchmarks or other government contracts?

The provided data does not include specific performance metrics such as quality ratings, on-time delivery rates, or customer satisfaction scores. Therefore, a direct comparison to industry benchmarks or other government contracts is not possible based solely on this information. The contract's final value and duration are known, but qualitative performance assessments are absent. Further investigation into contract performance reports or past performance evaluations would be necessary for such a comparison.

What were the primary cost drivers for this contract, and did they align with initial projections?

As a Time and Materials (T&M) contract, the primary cost drivers would be direct labor hours (at specified hourly rates) and the cost of materials used, plus a fixed fee or profit. The data does not provide a breakdown of costs by labor and materials, nor does it include initial cost projections. The significant final value suggests that either labor hours, material costs, or both, exceeded initial expectations or that the scope of work expanded. The T&M structure inherently allows for cost growth if not tightly managed.

Were there any contract modifications or change orders that significantly impacted the total value?

The provided summary data does not detail specific contract modifications or change orders. However, the contract duration of over 7 years and the final value of approximately $61.9 million strongly suggest that modifications were likely issued to adjust the scope, extend the period of performance, or incorporate changes in requirements or pricing. The absence of this detail in the summary means we cannot assess the impact of specific changes on the total cost.

What is the typical profit margin for contracts of this type and size within the aerospace maintenance sector?

The data indicates the contract type was 'TIME AND MATERIALS' (PT) and the fee structure was 'NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED' (PSC 3728). For T&M contracts, profit is typically incorporated as a fixed fee or a percentage applied to direct labor and materials. Without knowing the specific fee structure or the breakdown of costs, calculating the exact profit margin is impossible. Industry standards for profit margins in defense contracting can vary widely but often range from 5% to 15%, depending on risk, complexity, and competition. This contract's profit margin remains unquantified with the available data.

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: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 7

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: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: F3460197D0423

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline