Naval Air Systems Command awarded $155.7M for technical representative services, with a significant portion going to Boeing

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $155,688,663 ($155.7M)

Contractor: THE Boeing Company (0674)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-04-18

End Date: 2009-08-15

Contract Duration: 1,580 days

Daily Burn Rate: $98.5K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: NOT REPORTED

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200510!210202!1700!N00019!NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001905C0045 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050418!20060331!006265946!006265946!009256819!N!MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORPORATION,!6200 MCDONNELL BLVD !SAINT LOUIS !MO!63166!65000!510!29!ST. LOUIS !ST. LOUIS (CITY) !MISSOURI !+000007250000!N!N!000014500000!L010!TECH REP SVCS/WEAPONS !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541330!E! !1! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B!F! !N!A!D!U!J!1!001!N!2A!Z!N!A! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !A!A!A!A!000!A!A!N! ! ! ! !1719!N00019!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: SAINT LOUIS, ST. LOUIS (CITY) County, MISSOURI, 63166

State: Missouri Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $155.7 million to THE BOEING COMPANY (0674) for work described as: 200510!210202!1700!N00019!NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001905C0045 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050418!20060331!006265946!006265946!009256819!N!MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORPORATION,!6200 MCDONNELL BLVD !SAINT LOUIS !MO!63166!65000!510!29!ST. LOUIS !ST. … Key points: 1. Contract awarded for technical representative services, indicating a need for specialized expertise. 2. The award to McDonnell Douglas Corporation (later Boeing) suggests a focus on established defense contractors. 3. A long performance period of over 4 years points to a sustained requirement for these services. 4. The contract's value of $155.7 million places it as a significant investment in naval aviation support. 5. The 'NOT COMPETED' status raises questions about the procurement process and potential missed savings. 6. The primary NAICS code (541330) indicates engineering services, aligning with technical support roles.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $155.7 million for technical representative services over approximately 4 years suggests a substantial investment. Without comparable contract data or detailed cost breakdowns, it's difficult to definitively benchmark the value for money. However, the lack of competition (see CA section) inherently limits the government's ability to secure the most competitive pricing, potentially leading to a higher per-unit cost than if the contract had been openly competed.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded under a 'NOT COMPETED' status, indicating it was not subjected to a full and open competition. This typically occurs when only one source is capable of meeting the requirement, or in specific circumstances like sole-source justifications. The lack of multiple bidders means there was no direct price comparison or negotiation leverage derived from a competitive bidding process, which can impact the final price.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure. The government did not benefit from the potential for lower prices that typically arises from multiple companies vying for the contract.

Public Impact

Naval aviation programs benefit from specialized technical support, ensuring operational readiness and effectiveness. The services provided likely involve on-site technical assistance, troubleshooting, and maintenance support for naval aircraft systems. The geographic impact is primarily within naval air stations and operational units where these aircraft are deployed. Workforce implications include the employment of highly skilled technical representatives with specific knowledge of naval aviation platforms.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may have resulted in higher costs for taxpayers.
Limited transparency in the procurement process due to sole-source award.
Potential for vendor lock-in given the specialized nature of technical representative services.

Positive Signals

Award to a major defense contractor (Boeing) suggests a high level of capability and reliability.
Long contract duration indicates a stable and ongoing need for these critical support services.
Focus on technical representative services ensures specialized expertise is available for complex naval systems.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting defense-related technical representation. The defense sector is characterized by long-term, high-value contracts often awarded to large, established companies with specialized capabilities. Spending in this area is critical for maintaining the operational readiness of complex military assets. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within other technical support services contracts for major defense platforms.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that this was not a small business set-aside. Given the 'NOT COMPETED' status and the nature of the services (technical representative for complex weapons systems), it is unlikely that small businesses were primary awardees or significant subcontractors unless they were part of a larger prime contractor's team. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to assess small business impact.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be tied to performance metrics outlined in the contract statement of work. Transparency is limited by the sole-source nature of the award; however, contract award data is publicly available through federal procurement databases. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Naval Aviation Maintenance Programs
Defense Contractor Support Services
Weapon Systems Technical Support
Engineering and Technical Services Contracts
Department of Defense Procurement

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Potential for Overpricing
Limited Transparency in Procurement

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $155.7 million to THE BOEING COMPANY (0674). 200510!210202!1700!N00019!NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001905C0045 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050418!20060331!006265946!006265946!009256819!N!MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORPORATION,!6200 MCDONNELL BLVD !SAINT LOUIS !MO!63166!65000!510!29!ST. LOUIS !ST. LOUIS (CITY) !MISSOURI !+000007250000!N!N!000014500000!L010!TECH REP SVCS/WEAPONS !S1 !SERVICES !000 !* !541330!E! !1! ! ! ! ! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE BOEING COMPANY (0674).

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $155.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-04-18. End: 2009-08-15.

What specific technical representative services were provided under this contract?

The contract identifies the service as 'TECH REP SVCS/WEAPONS' under NAICS code 541330 (Engineering Services). This typically involves providing highly skilled personnel to support the operation, maintenance, and training related to specific weapons systems or platforms. For naval aviation, this could include on-site support for aircraft systems, troubleshooting, diagnostics, repair guidance, and potentially training for naval personnel. The exact scope would be detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW), which is not provided in the abbreviated data.

Why was this contract awarded on a sole-source basis?

The data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED'. Sole-source awards are typically justified when only one responsible source is available or capable of meeting the government's needs. Reasons can include unique capabilities, proprietary technology, urgent and compelling needs where competition is not feasible, or when a previous contract was terminated for default and only one other source exists. Without the specific justification documentation (e.g., Justification and Approval - J&A), the precise reason for the sole-source award remains unknown, but it implies a lack of readily available alternatives.

How does the contract duration and value compare to similar technical support contracts?

The contract had a duration of approximately 1580 days (around 4.3 years) and a value of $155.7 million. This translates to an average annual value of roughly $36 million. This is a substantial amount, indicative of significant support requirements for complex naval systems. Benchmarking requires comparing it to other technical representative or engineering support contracts for similar naval platforms (e.g., specific aircraft types, ship systems). Contracts for highly specialized technical support often have long durations and high values due to the expertise required and the criticality of the systems being supported.

What is the track record of McDonnell Douglas Corporation/The Boeing Company in providing similar services?

McDonnell Douglas Corporation, which was acquired by The Boeing Company in 1997, has a long and extensive history of providing complex engineering, manufacturing, and support services to the U.S. Department of Defense, including the Navy. Boeing is a major defense contractor with deep expertise in aerospace and defense systems. They routinely provide technical support, logistics, and sustainment services for numerous military platforms. This specific contract award suggests they were considered a capable provider for these technical representative services at the time.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source contract of this magnitude?

The primary risk associated with a sole-source contract of this magnitude is the potential for reduced value for money due to the lack of competition. Without competing bids, the government may pay higher prices than necessary. Other risks include vendor lock-in, where the government becomes dependent on a single provider, potentially limiting future flexibility. There's also a risk of complacency from the contractor, as the pressure to innovate or improve efficiency is lower without competitive threats. Oversight becomes even more critical to ensure performance and fair pricing.

What was the historical spending trend for technical representative services by the Naval Air Systems Command around 2005?

The provided data represents a single contract award from 2005. To understand historical spending trends, one would need to analyze aggregate spending data for the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) and specifically for the 'TECH REP SVCS/WEAPONS' category or related engineering services (NAICS 541330) over several fiscal years prior to and following 2005. This would involve querying federal procurement databases like FPDS-NG (Federal Procurement Data System - Next Generation) or USASpending.gov for NAVAIR's obligations in relevant categories. Such an analysis would reveal if this $155.7 million award was an outlier or part of a consistent spending pattern.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE SVCS. › TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: NOT REPORTED (NO)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: THE Boeing Company (UEI: 009256819)

Address: 6200 MCDONNELL BLVD, SAINT LOUIS, MO, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Timeline