Army awards $24.2M for MH-60R aircraft hydraulic, vacuum, and de-icing systems support

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,266,536 ($24.3M)

Contractor: Sikorsky Support Services Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-12-29

End Date: 2007-02-28

Contract Duration: 426 days

Daily Burn Rate: $57.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Defense

Official Description: TAS::21 2020::TAS 200605!001848!2100!W58RGZ!USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!W9115104D0019 !A!N! !N!BS01 ! !20051229!20101231!107254062!107254062!001344142!N!SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES, INC!6900 MAIN ST !STRATFORD !CT!06615!74260!001!09!STRATFORD !FAIRFIELD !CONN !+000019309650!N!N!000000000000!1650!ACFT HYDRAULIC, VACUUM&DE-ICING SYS COMP !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !191 !MH-60R !336413!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!N!Y!2!005!N!3A!Z!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !A!A!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: BEEVILLE, BEE County, TEXAS, 78102

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $24.3 million to SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES INC for work described as: TAS::21 2020::TAS 200605!001848!2100!W58RGZ!USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!W9115104D0019 !A!N! !N!BS01 ! !20051229!20101231!107254062!107254062!001344142!N!SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES, INC!6900 MAIN ST !STRATFORD !CT!06615!74260!001!09!STRATFO… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for critical aircraft component support, ensuring operational readiness. 2. Significant portion of contract value allocated to specialized component maintenance. 3. Contract duration of 426 days indicates a focused, short-term support requirement. 4. Awarded to a single contractor, suggesting specialized expertise or limited market. 5. Geographic location of contractor in Connecticut may influence logistics and response times. 6. Contract type (Time and Materials) allows for flexibility but requires close monitoring of costs.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $24.2 million for support services related to aircraft hydraulic, vacuum, and de-icing systems appears reasonable given the specialized nature of the components. Benchmarking against similar contracts for aviation component maintenance and repair is challenging without more specific service details. However, the award amount is within a typical range for such specialized support for military aircraft. The Time and Materials pricing structure necessitates careful oversight to ensure cost-effectiveness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' which suggests that while competition was sought, certain sources were excluded, potentially due to specific technical requirements or prior performance. The data indicates only one award was made, implying limited bidder participation or a highly specialized requirement that only one contractor could meet. This level of competition may lead to less aggressive pricing compared to a broader, unrestricted competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition suggests that taxpayers may not have benefited from the most competitive pricing possible. The government may have had to accept the price offered by the sole responsive bidder, potentially at a higher cost than if multiple companies had vied for the contract.

Public Impact

The U.S. Army benefits from the continued operational readiness of its MH-60R aircraft fleet. Services delivered include maintenance and support for critical hydraulic, vacuum, and de-icing systems. The primary geographic impact is on Army aviation units utilizing the MH-60R helicopter. Workforce implications include specialized technicians required for aircraft component maintenance.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials pricing structure.
Limited competition may result in higher-than-market pricing.
Dependence on a single contractor could create supply chain risks if issues arise.
Exclusion of sources in competition requires clear justification to ensure fairness and best value.

Positive Signals

Award to a contractor with likely specialized expertise in MH-60R systems.
Focus on critical aircraft components ensures mission capability.
Contract provides necessary support for a key military asset.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader aerospace and defense sector, specifically supporting aviation maintenance and component services. The market for specialized aircraft component support is often characterized by a limited number of highly qualified contractors due to the technical expertise and certifications required. Spending in this area is crucial for maintaining the readiness of military aviation assets. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within other Department of Defense contracts for similar aircraft types and component systems.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any small business set-aside or subcontracting requirements for this contract. The award was made to Sikorsky Support Services, Inc., a large business entity. Therefore, this contract does not appear to directly benefit small businesses through set-asides, though they might be involved as subcontractors if not explicitly excluded.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would include performance reviews, adherence to contract terms, and financial audits, especially given the Time and Materials pricing. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, though detailed operational oversight specifics are typically internal to the agency.

Related Government Programs

MH-60R Helicopter Support
Aircraft Component Maintenance
Aviation Systems Support
Department of Defense Aviation Contracts
Naval Aviation Support

Risk Flags

Limited Competition
Time and Materials Pricing
Potential for Cost Overruns
Contractor Dependency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $24.3 million to SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES INC. TAS::21 2020::TAS 200605!001848!2100!W58RGZ!USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!W9115104D0019 !A!N! !N!BS01 ! !20051229!20101231!107254062!107254062!001344142!N!SIKORSKY SUPPORT SERVICES, INC!6900 MAIN ST !STRATFORD !CT!06615!74260!001!09!STRATFORD !FAIRFIELD !CONN !+000019309650!N!N!000000000000!1650!ACFT HYDRAULIC, VACUUM&DE-ICING SYS COMP !A1A!AIRFRAMES AND SPARES !191 !MH-60R !336413!E!

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SIKORSKY SUPPORT 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 $24.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-12-29. End: 2007-02-28.

What is the specific technical expertise of Sikorsky Support Services, Inc. that made them the sole qualified bidder for this contract?

Sikorsky Support Services, Inc., a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin, possesses extensive experience and established expertise in the manufacturing, maintenance, and support of Sikorsky-produced helicopters, including the MH-60R Seahawk. This includes deep knowledge of the complex hydraulic, vacuum, and de-icing systems integral to the aircraft's operation. Their long-standing relationship with the MH-60R platform, often stemming from original equipment manufacturing, provides them with unique insights, proprietary technical data, and specialized tooling. This specialized knowledge, coupled with required certifications and security clearances, likely positioned them as the most capable, and potentially only, contractor able to meet the stringent technical requirements and performance standards stipulated in the solicitation, leading to the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' designation.

How does the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type compare to other pricing arrangements for similar aviation support services in terms of cost control?

Time and Materials (T&M) contracts, like the one awarded to Sikorsky Support Services, Inc., offer flexibility by reimbursing the contractor for the actual cost of labor (at specified hourly rates) and materials, plus a fixed fee or percentage for overhead and profit. This contrasts with Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contracts, where the price is set regardless of the contractor's actual costs, incentivizing efficiency. While T&M can be advantageous when the scope of work is uncertain or likely to change, it carries a higher risk of cost overruns for the government if not closely monitored. For aviation support services, FFP contracts are often preferred for well-defined maintenance tasks to ensure cost certainty. However, for complex, evolving support needs or when specialized, hard-to-quantify labor is involved, T&M can be justified, but it necessitates robust government oversight, detailed record-keeping, and regular audits to manage costs effectively and prevent potential abuses.

What are the potential risks associated with awarding a contract for critical aircraft components to a single provider?

Awarding a contract for critical aircraft components to a single provider, as indicated by the limited competition in this case, presents several potential risks. Firstly, it can lead to a lack of price competition, potentially resulting in higher costs for the government compared to a scenario with multiple bidders. Secondly, it creates a dependency on that single contractor; any disruption to their operations, such as labor disputes, financial instability, or production issues, could directly impact the availability of essential parts and services, thereby jeopardizing aircraft readiness. Thirdly, without the pressure of competition, the contractor might have less incentive to innovate or improve service quality over time. Finally, the government has limited leverage in negotiating future contracts or addressing performance issues, as switching providers for highly specialized systems can be complex and costly.

What is the historical spending pattern for MH-60R aircraft support services by the Department of the Army?

Historical spending data for MH-60R aircraft support services by the Department of the Army reveals a consistent requirement for maintenance, repair, and component support. While specific figures fluctuate annually based on operational tempo, fleet age, and modernization efforts, the Army has historically allocated significant funds to ensure the readiness of its aviation assets, including the MH-60R. This particular contract, valued at $24.2 million over its period of performance, aligns with previous spending trends for specialized aviation support. Analysis of past contracts for similar services indicates that multi-million dollar awards are common for comprehensive support packages, often involving multiple task orders over several years. The recurring nature of these expenditures underscores the ongoing need for robust sustainment programs for complex military aircraft.

How does the geographic location of the contractor (Stratford, CT) potentially impact the delivery of services and overall contract value?

The geographic location of Sikorsky Support Services, Inc. in Stratford, Connecticut, can have several implications for this contract. Stratford is a hub for aerospace manufacturing and support, suggesting proximity to a skilled workforce and potentially established supply chains relevant to Sikorsky products. However, if the Army units operating the MH-60R aircraft are geographically dispersed or located far from Connecticut, the distance could introduce logistical challenges and increased costs related to shipping, travel, and response times for urgent support needs. While the contract value itself is fixed, the efficiency and timeliness of service delivery can be influenced by location. For instance, rapid deployment of technical teams or expedited return of components for repair might incur higher transportation costs or delays if the distance is substantial, impacting the overall 'value' realized from the contract beyond the stated dollar amount.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Aircraft Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT COMPONENTS AND ACCESSORIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: RTX Corp (UEI: 001344142)

Address: 6900 MAIN STREET, STRATFORD, CT, 06615

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W9115104D0019

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline