Honeywell International Inc. awarded $100.6M for EPBL Secondary Power Sustainment at Hill AFB

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $100,616,081 ($100.6M)

Contractor: Honeywell International Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2018-12-20

End Date: 2024-09-30

Contract Duration: 2,111 days

Daily Burn Rate: $47.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE INCENTIVE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: EPBL SECONDARY POWER SUSTAINMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE 419TH AT HILL AFB UT,

Place of Performance

Location: PHOENIX, MARICOPA County, ARIZONA, 85034

State: Arizona Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $100.6 million to HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC. for work described as: EPBL SECONDARY POWER SUSTAINMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE 419TH AT HILL AFB UT, Key points: 1. Contract awarded to a single, established aerospace and defense prime. 2. Significant duration of over 5 years suggests a long-term sustainment need. 3. Fixed Price Incentive contract type indicates shared risk between government and contractor. 4. The contract is for sustainment, implying ongoing operational support rather than new development. 5. The award is a delivery order against a larger contract vehicle. 6. The primary place of performance is Arizona, though the end-user is at Hill AFB, Utah.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific delivery order is challenging without knowing the parent contract's scope and pricing structure. However, the total award amount of over $100 million for sustainment services over nearly six years suggests a substantial investment. The fixed-price incentive structure aims to control costs, but the ultimate value depends on performance against targets. Comparisons to similar sustainment contracts for complex aircraft systems would be necessary for a more definitive assessment of value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded as a sole-source action, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This approach is typically used when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities, intellectual property, or is the only source capable of meeting the requirement. The lack of competition means the government did not benefit from price discovery through a bidding process, potentially leading to higher costs than if it had been competed.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards limit taxpayer benefit by removing the competitive pressure that drives down prices. The government must rely on negotiation and oversight to ensure a fair price.

Public Impact

The 419th at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, benefits from sustained operational capability of the EPBL system. Services delivered include sustainment and support for critical secondary power systems. The primary geographic impact for performance is Arizona, supporting the contractor's operations. This contract supports a segment of the aerospace and defense industrial workforce involved in aircraft sustainment.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potential cost savings for taxpayers.
Long contract duration could lead to cost overruns if not managed effectively.
Fixed Price Incentive contract requires careful monitoring of performance metrics to ensure value.

Positive Signals

Contract provides critical sustainment for an operational Air Force unit.
Fixed Price Incentive contract structure aligns contractor and government interests on cost and performance.
Long-term award provides stability for sustainment operations and planning.

Sector Analysis

The aerospace and defense sector is characterized by high-value, complex systems requiring specialized sustainment. This contract falls within the aircraft manufacturing and support sub-sector, where long-term maintenance and upgrade services are crucial for maintaining fleet readiness. The market is dominated by a few large prime contractors like Honeywell, who possess the technical expertise and infrastructure to support such critical systems. Spending in this area is driven by defense budgets and the operational tempo of military assets.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. The prime contractor, Honeywell International Inc., is a large business. There is no explicit information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses within this specific delivery order. However, large defense contracts often include subcontracting goals, and it would be typical for a portion of this work to be performed by smaller suppliers within the aerospace ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of the Air Force contracting and program management offices. As a delivery order under a larger contract, its execution is monitored against the terms and conditions of the parent vehicle. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse. The fixed-price incentive structure necessitates performance monitoring to ensure accountability.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft sustainment programs
Aerospace manufacturing support
Air Force depot maintenance contracts
Power systems support contracts
Defense logistics and maintenance

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Long contract duration
Potential for cost overruns
Lack of competitive benchmarking

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $100.6 million to HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.. EPBL SECONDARY POWER SUSTAINMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE 419TH AT HILL AFB UT,

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL 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 $100.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-12-20. End: 2024-09-30.

What is the historical spending trend for EPBL Secondary Power Sustainment at Hill AFB?

Analyzing historical spending for this specific EPBL Secondary Power Sustainment requirement at Hill AFB requires access to detailed contract data beyond the provided snippet. Typically, sustainment contracts are long-term and may involve multiple delivery orders or contract modifications over several years. To understand the trend, one would need to examine prior awards for similar services, including the number of contracts, their values, durations, and the incumbent contractors. A significant increase or decrease in spending could indicate changes in operational tempo, system upgrades, or shifts in sustainment strategy. Without historical data, it's difficult to determine if the current $100.6 million award represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of investment for this capability.

How does the performance of Honeywell International Inc. on similar sustainment contracts compare?

Assessing Honeywell International Inc.'s performance on similar sustainment contracts requires a review of their past performance evaluations, contract award histories, and any documented issues or successes. Key metrics to consider would include on-time delivery, adherence to budget, quality of service, and responsiveness to government needs. Publicly available contract databases often contain past performance information, though detailed qualitative assessments may be limited. A comparative analysis would involve looking at contracts for aircraft component sustainment, power systems support, or similar complex equipment maintenance. Positive indicators would include a history of meeting performance targets and receiving favorable ratings, while negative indicators might include contract disputes, performance failures, or significant cost overruns on previous related work.

What are the specific risks associated with a sole-source award for critical aircraft sustainment?

A sole-source award for critical aircraft sustainment carries several inherent risks. Foremost among these is the potential for inflated pricing due to the lack of competitive pressure, which can lead to inefficient use of taxpayer funds. Without competition, there is less incentive for the contractor to innovate or reduce costs aggressively. Furthermore, reliance on a single provider can create vendor lock-in, making it difficult and costly to switch suppliers if performance degrades or needs change. There's also a risk that the sole-source provider may deprioritize the contract if other, more lucrative opportunities arise. Ensuring robust contract oversight, clear performance metrics, and fair negotiation becomes paramount to mitigate these risks.

What is the estimated value of the entire contract vehicle from which this delivery order was issued?

The provided data snippet pertains to a specific delivery order ('aw') valued at $100,616,081.01, issued under a larger contract vehicle. To determine the total value of the parent contract, one would need to consult the contract's base value and any exercised options or subsequent delivery orders associated with it. This information is typically available in comprehensive contract databases like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS). The total contract value could be significantly higher than this single delivery order, reflecting the overall scope and duration of the sustainment effort. Understanding the total contract value is crucial for assessing the government's long-term commitment and the overall scale of the program.

How does the duration of this contract (2111 days) compare to typical aircraft sustainment contracts?

A duration of 2111 days, which is approximately 5.78 years, is quite common for aircraft sustainment contracts. These agreements are designed to provide long-term support for complex weapon systems, ensuring operational readiness over extended periods. Typical sustainment contracts can range from 3 to 10 years, often including options for extension. The length reflects the lifecycle of the aircraft and the ongoing need for maintenance, repair, overhaul, and logistical support. Shorter durations might be used for specific projects or initial support phases, while longer periods are standard for comprehensive sustainment, allowing for predictable budgeting and stable contractor support.

Industry Classification

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

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE INCENTIVE (L)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Honeywell Safety Products USA, Inc.

Address: 111 S 34TH ST, PHOENIX, AZ, 85034

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $100,616,081

Exercised Options: $100,616,081

Current Obligation: $100,616,081

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: SPRPA118D001U

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline