Agriculture Department awards $7.5M contract for large airtanker services to Neptune Aviation

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $7,572,159 ($7.6M)

Contractor: Neptune Aviation Services, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Agriculture

Start Date: 2025-01-01

End Date: 2025-12-31

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $20.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: EU, NEXT GEN 2.0 LARGE AIRTANKER - NEPTUNE AVIATION LINE ITEM #1

Place of Performance

Location: BOISE, ADA County, IDAHO, 83705

State: Idaho Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Agriculture obligated $7.6 million to NEPTUNE AVIATION SERVICES, INC. for work described as: EU, NEXT GEN 2.0 LARGE AIRTANKER - NEPTUNE AVIATION LINE ITEM #1 Key points: 1. Contract provides critical aerial firefighting capabilities for the upcoming season. 2. Pricing appears competitive given the specialized nature of large airtankers. 3. Sole-source award raises questions about potential cost efficiencies and market alternatives. 4. Performance will be crucial for wildfire suppression effectiveness. 5. This contract supports the Forest Service's broader wildfire management strategy. 6. The contract duration aligns with typical fire seasons, ensuring continuity.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $7.58 million for a single large airtanker for one year appears within a reasonable range for specialized aerial firefighting assets. However, without direct comparisons to similar recent contracts for identical aircraft types and service levels, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The firm-fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government, but the absence of robust competition limits the opportunity for potential price reductions.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one vendor, Neptune Aviation Services, Inc., was considered. While the data indicates 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES,' the final award is sole-source. This suggests that either no other qualified vendors could be identified or met specific requirements, or a previous competitive process did not yield suitable results. The lack of competition limits the government's ability to leverage market forces to achieve the best possible pricing and terms.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not be receiving the most cost-effective solution due to the absence of competitive bidding. This could result in a higher price than if multiple vendors had vied for the contract.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the US Forest Service and the public, who receive enhanced wildfire protection. Services delivered include aerial suppression of wildfires, crucial for minimizing damage. The geographic impact is focused on areas prone to wildfires, primarily within Idaho. Workforce implications include support for specialized aviation personnel and ground crews.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price discovery and potential cost savings for taxpayers.
Reliance on a single provider could create risks if performance issues arise or capacity is strained.
Limited transparency into the justification for sole-source award could obscure potential alternatives.

Positive Signals

Contract provides essential, specialized aerial firefighting capability.
Firm-fixed-price contract offers budget certainty.
Contract duration aligns with operational needs for the fire season.

Sector Analysis

The aerial firefighting sector is highly specialized, dominated by a few key providers capable of operating large, sophisticated aircraft like airtankers. The market is driven by seasonal demand, government contracts, and stringent safety and operational requirements. Neptune Aviation Services is a known entity in this space. Spending benchmarks are difficult to establish precisely due to the unique nature of each contract and aircraft, but large airtanker contracts typically represent significant investments for agencies.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to involve small business set-asides, as Neptune Aviation Services, Inc. is a large business. There is no explicit indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses within the provided data. The focus is on securing a large, specialized asset, which typically bypasses small business participation goals.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight will likely be managed by the US Forest Service contracting officers and program managers responsible for aviation and wildfire suppression. Accountability measures are embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and delivery requirements. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, though the justification for sole-source awards can sometimes be less detailed publicly. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Wildfire Suppression Services
Aviation Support Services
Emergency Response Contracts
Department of Agriculture Contracts
Forest Service Aviation Management

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Potential lack of competitive pricing
Dependence on a single provider

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Agriculture awarded $7.6 million to NEPTUNE AVIATION SERVICES, INC.. EU, NEXT GEN 2.0 LARGE AIRTANKER - NEPTUNE AVIATION LINE ITEM #1

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is NEPTUNE AVIATION SERVICES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Agriculture (Forest Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $7.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-01-01. End: 2025-12-31.

What is Neptune Aviation Services, Inc.'s track record with federal contracts, particularly for airtanker services?

Neptune Aviation Services, Inc. has a history of providing large airtanker services to federal agencies, including the US Forest Service. They operate a fleet of various airtanker types. Their track record typically involves responding to wildfire events and fulfilling contract obligations. Past performance data, often available through government databases and performance evaluations, would provide a more detailed picture of their reliability, safety record, and operational effectiveness. However, specific details on past issues or exceptional performance require deeper investigation into contract performance reports and agency records.

How does the $7.58 million cost compare to similar large airtanker contracts awarded by the Forest Service or other agencies?

Benchmarking this $7.58 million contract is challenging without direct comparisons of identical aircraft types, service durations, and operational scope. Large airtankers are highly specialized assets, and their operating costs (including maintenance, crew, fuel, and insurance) are substantial. Contracts can vary significantly based on the specific aircraft model (e.g., DC-10, BAe-146), the number of flight hours guaranteed, and the required availability. Generally, contracts for large airtankers can range from several million to tens of millions of dollars annually, depending on these factors. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests a set cost for the service period, but the lack of competition makes a precise value comparison difficult.

What are the primary risks associated with awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The primary risks of a sole-source award include potential overpayment due to the lack of competitive pressure, limited innovation from the incumbent provider, and a reduced incentive for the contractor to offer the most cost-effective solutions. There's also a strategic risk if Neptune Aviation Services faces operational issues (e.g., mechanical failures, pilot shortages) that could ground their fleet, as there are no immediate alternative providers secured through competition. Furthermore, it limits the government's ability to explore new technologies or different service models that might be offered by other potential vendors.

How effective is the Forest Service's current fleet of large airtankers in meeting national wildfire suppression needs?

The effectiveness of the Forest Service's large airtanker fleet is a critical component of national wildfire suppression strategy. These aircraft provide rapid response and significant retardant-dropping capacity, which can be crucial in containing initial wildfire spread. However, the overall effectiveness depends on fleet size, aircraft availability (influenced by maintenance and operational readiness), pilot availability, and the strategic deployment of these assets. Debates often arise regarding the optimal number and types of airtankers needed versus the associated costs and risks. This specific contract addresses one part of that larger fleet capability.

What has been the historical spending trend for large airtanker services by the Department of Agriculture over the past five years?

Historical spending on large airtanker services by the Department of Agriculture, primarily through the Forest Service, has generally been substantial and subject to fluctuations based on wildfire activity and budget appropriations. While precise figures require database queries, annual spending often falls within the tens to hundreds of millions of dollars range, encompassing multiple contracts for various airtanker types and service agreements. Factors influencing spending include the severity of fire seasons, the availability of aircraft through contracts, and policy decisions regarding aerial firefighting resources. The trend reflects a consistent need for these critical assets.

Are there any specific performance metrics or service level agreements (SLAs) tied to this contract that ensure accountability?

While the provided data does not detail specific performance metrics or SLAs, federal contracts of this nature typically include such clauses. These would likely cover aspects like aircraft availability (e.g., response time to dispatch), operational readiness, maintenance schedules, safety compliance, and potentially mission completion rates or effectiveness indicators. Failure to meet these defined metrics could result in penalties, contract modifications, or even termination. The firm-fixed-price structure implies payment for services rendered according to the contract's terms, which would incorporate these performance expectations.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Transportation and Warehousing › Nonscheduled Air Transportation › Nonscheduled Chartered Freight Air Transportation

Product/Service Code: TRANSPORT, TRAVEL, RELOCATION › TRANSPORTATION OF THINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4301 CORPORATE WAY, MISSOULA, MT, 59808

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $8,172,500

Exercised Options: $8,172,500

Current Obligation: $7,572,159

Actual Outlays: $6,902,020

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 1202SA22T9106

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline