Coast Guard awards $30.6M for MH-65 aircraft spares, citing non-availability exception

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,604 ($30.6K)

Contractor: Airbus Helicopters, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2026-04-02

End Date: 2026-07-30

Contract Duration: 119 days

Daily Burn Rate: $257/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: PROCUREMENT OF VARIOUS SPARES USED ON THE MH-65 AIRCRAFT. CLASS DETERMINATION FOR NONAVAILABILITY ARTICLES IAW FAR 25.103(B)(1) APPLIES TO THIS ACTION, BAA EXCEPTION MTF IS IN THE FILE.

Place of Performance

Location: GRAND PRAIRIE, TARRANT County, TEXAS, 75052

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $30,604.28 to AIRBUS HELICOPTERS, INC. for work described as: PROCUREMENT OF VARIOUS SPARES USED ON THE MH-65 AIRCRAFT. CLASS DETERMINATION FOR NONAVAILABILITY ARTICLES IAW FAR 25.103(B)(1) APPLIES TO THIS ACTION, BAA EXCEPTION MTF IS IN THE FILE. Key points: 1. Contract awarded for essential spares for MH-65 aircraft, ensuring operational readiness. 2. Sole-source award due to non-availability of articles, limiting competitive options. 3. Delivery order under an existing contract structure, suggesting a need for rapid fulfillment. 4. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs for the duration of the order. 5. Texas-based contractor indicates potential regional economic impact. 6. Limited competition may impact price discovery and value for money.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $30.6 million for aircraft spares is significant. Without specific benchmarks for MH-65 spares, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, sole-source awards often carry a premium due to the lack of competitive pressure. The fixed-price nature of the contract provides some cost certainty, but the absence of competition raises questions about whether the government secured the best possible pricing. Further analysis would require comparison with historical pricing for similar spares or alternative sourcing options.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, citing a Class Determination for Non-Availability of Articles per FAR 25.103(b)(1). This means that the specific parts required for the MH-65 aircraft were not available through competitive means, necessitating a direct award to a single source. The exception implies that only Airbus Helicopters, Inc. could provide these critical components at the time of procurement. Consequently, there was no opportunity for multiple bidders to compete, which limits the government's ability to leverage market forces for price negotiation.

Taxpayer Impact: The sole-source nature of this award means taxpayers did not benefit from competitive bidding, potentially leading to higher costs than if multiple suppliers had vied for the contract. The justification of non-availability suggests a critical need that overrides standard competitive procurement practices.

Public Impact

The U.S. Coast Guard benefits directly through the acquisition of essential spare parts for its MH-65 helicopter fleet. Operational readiness and safety of MH-65 aircraft are maintained, ensuring the Coast Guard's ability to perform its missions. The contract supports the maintenance and sustainment of critical aviation assets within the Department of Homeland Security. Workforce implications include ensuring aviation mechanics and support personnel have the necessary parts to perform their duties. Geographic impact is centered around the operational bases of the MH-65 fleet and the contractor's location in Texas.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition, potentially increasing costs for taxpayers.
Reliance on a single source for critical spares could create future supply chain vulnerabilities.
The 'non-availability' justification requires scrutiny to ensure it was indeed the only viable option.

Positive Signals

Contract ensures operational readiness of vital MH-65 aircraft.
Fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for this specific order.
Awarding to an established supplier may ensure quality and timely delivery of critical components.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on aircraft parts manufacturing and supply. The market for specialized aviation spares can be highly concentrated, often dominated by original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) or their authorized distributors due to proprietary designs, certifications, and technical expertise. The U.S. Coast Guard's MH-65 fleet represents a niche but critical segment of this market. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for similar specialized helicopter or aircraft component procurements, considering factors like fleet size, aircraft age, and operational tempo.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the prime contractor, Airbus Helicopters, Inc., is a large business. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses within the provided data. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem appears minimal for this specific award, although large prime contractors often utilize small businesses in their broader supply chains, which is not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the U.S. Coast Guard's contracting and program management offices within the Department of Homeland Security. The fixed-price contract type offers some level of cost control. Transparency is facilitated by the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS), where contract actions are reported. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse. The specific justification for non-availability (FAR 25.103(b)(1)) would be subject to review by oversight bodies if questions arise about its validity.

Related Government Programs

MH-65 Helicopter Sustainment
Aviation Parts Procurement
Department of Homeland Security Aviation Contracts
Coast Guard Aircraft Maintenance
Sole-Source Defense Procurements

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Potential for price escalation
Supply chain dependency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $30,604.28 to AIRBUS HELICOPTERS, INC.. PROCUREMENT OF VARIOUS SPARES USED ON THE MH-65 AIRCRAFT. CLASS DETERMINATION FOR NONAVAILABILITY ARTICLES IAW FAR 25.103(B)(1) APPLIES TO THIS ACTION, BAA EXCEPTION MTF IS IN THE FILE.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AIRBUS HELICOPTERS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (U.S. Coast Guard).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $30,604.28.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-04-02. End: 2026-07-30.

What is the historical spending pattern for MH-65 aircraft spares with Airbus Helicopters, Inc.?

Analyzing historical spending for MH-65 spares with Airbus Helicopters, Inc. requires accessing detailed procurement data over several fiscal years. This would involve identifying all contract actions, delivery orders, and modifications issued to this contractor for these specific parts. Key metrics to examine would include the total annual spending, the average value of individual awards, and the frequency of sole-source versus competitively awarded contracts. Understanding past spending trends can reveal patterns of demand, potential price escalation over time, and the extent to which the Coast Guard has relied on non-competitive awards for these critical components. Without access to this historical data, it is difficult to contextualize the current $30.6 million award.

How does the pricing of these spares compare to similar components for other helicopter types operated by the government?

Benchmarking the pricing of these MH-65 spares against similar components for other government helicopter types is challenging without specific cost data and detailed specifications for comparable parts. However, a general assessment can be made by considering the complexity, size, and technological sophistication of the MH-65 aircraft and its components. Specialized, mission-critical helicopter parts, especially those from OEMs, tend to be expensive due to high research and development costs, stringent quality control, and limited production runs. If data were available, comparisons would focus on metrics like cost per pound, cost per major component (e.g., rotor blade, engine part), or cost as a percentage of the aircraft's total value. The sole-source nature of this award further complicates direct price comparisons, as competitive market forces are absent.

What are the specific risks associated with relying on a sole-source provider for critical aircraft spares?

Relying on a sole-source provider for critical aircraft spares introduces several significant risks. Firstly, there is a heightened risk of price gouging, as the contractor faces little to no competitive pressure to offer the best possible price. Secondly, supply chain disruptions become a major concern; if the sole-source provider experiences production issues, financial instability, or geopolitical challenges, the government's access to essential parts can be severely impacted, potentially grounding aircraft. Thirdly, innovation and technological upgrades may be slower, as the sole provider may have less incentive to invest in improving components or processes. Finally, the government loses leverage in negotiations, making it harder to secure favorable terms or delivery schedules. This dependence necessitates robust contract management and continuous monitoring of the sole-source justification.

What is the track record of Airbus Helicopters, Inc. in fulfilling government contracts for aviation parts?

Airbus Helicopters, Inc. has a substantial track record in fulfilling government contracts, particularly for aviation parts and services, given its position as a major global aerospace manufacturer. Analyzing their performance would involve reviewing past contract awards, delivery timeliness, quality of parts provided, and any instances of contract disputes or performance issues. Data from sources like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) and contract performance assessment reporting tools (e.g., CPARS) would be crucial. Generally, large, established companies like Airbus Helicopters are expected to have robust quality control and delivery systems. However, specific contract performance can vary, and it's important to assess their history with the Coast Guard and similar agencies to gauge reliability and adherence to contractual obligations.

What is the justification for the 'non-availability' clause, and has it been used frequently for this type of procurement?

The 'non-availability' clause, as cited under FAR 25.103(b)(1), is used when specific articles or services are not reasonably available from domestic sources or through full and open competition. This justification allows for a sole-source award. For this MH-65 spares contract, it implies that the specific parts required are either proprietary, require specialized manufacturing capabilities only held by Airbus Helicopters, or are otherwise not accessible via competitive bidding. The frequency of its use for MH-65 spares procurement would need to be assessed by reviewing historical contract data. If this justification is frequently invoked for the same or similar parts, it might indicate a systemic issue with market availability or a potential need for the government to explore alternative sourcing strategies or encourage new market entrants.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT AND STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2701 N FORUM DR, GRAND PRAIRIE, TX, 75052

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $30,604

Exercised Options: $30,604

Current Obligation: $30,604

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 70Z03823DB0000035

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline