DoD awards L3Harris Technologies $84M for JCREW EW system development, facing limited competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $84,076,293 ($84.1M)

Contractor: L3harris Technologies, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-10-01

End Date: 2013-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,277 days

Daily Burn Rate: $65.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR ALL MATERIAL AND SERVICES TO SUPPORT SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION PHASE THROUGH PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE THREE CAPABILITIES (DISMOUNTED, MOUNTED, AND FIXED SITE) OF THE JOINT COUNTER RADIO CONTROLLED IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE (RCIED) ELECTRONIC WARFARE (JCREW) 3.3 SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS 71 DEGREES CELSIUS AMBIENT TEMPERATURE.

Place of Performance

Location: CLIFTON, PASSAIC County, NEW JERSEY, 07014

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $84.1 million to L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. for work described as: AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR ALL MATERIAL AND SERVICES TO SUPPORT SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION PHASE THROUGH PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE THREE CAPABILITIES (DISMOUNTED, MOUNTED, AND FIXED SITE) OF THE JOINT COUNTER RADIO CONTROLLED IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE (RCIED) ELECT… Key points: 1. Contract value of $84.1M for system development and demonstration phase. 2. Awarded to L3Harris Technologies, Inc. for the JCREW 3.3 system. 3. Focuses on counter radio-controlled improvised explosive device (RCIED) electronic warfare. 4. Contract type is Cost Plus Incentive Fee, indicating shared risk. 5. Performance period spans from October 2009 to March 2013. 6. System capabilities include dismounted, mounted, and fixed site applications. 7. Ambient temperature requirement of 71 degrees Celsius noted.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $84.1 million for system development and demonstration appears within a reasonable range for complex electronic warfare systems. However, without specific benchmarks for similar RCIED EW system development contracts, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Cost Plus Incentive Fee structure suggests an attempt to control costs while incentivizing performance, but the final cost could vary. Further analysis would require comparing this award to other developmental contracts for similar capabilities.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a moderate level of competition for this specialized system. While full and open competition is generally favorable for price discovery, the specific number of bidders and the nature of the technology could influence the ultimate competitiveness of the bids received.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it generally leads to more competitive pricing and a wider range of innovative solutions being considered, potentially reducing overall program costs.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are military personnel requiring protection against RCIED threats. Services delivered include system development and demonstration for the JCREW 3.3 system. The geographic impact is likely global, supporting deployed forces. Workforce implications include specialized engineering and technical roles within L3Harris Technologies.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the defense electronics and electronic warfare sector, a highly specialized and technologically advanced segment of the aerospace and defense industry. The market for counter-IED technology is driven by ongoing global security needs. Spending in this sector is often characterized by long development cycles, high R&D investment, and significant government procurement. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other major defense system development contracts.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. Therefore, the direct impact on small businesses through set-asides is unlikely. However, L3Harris Technologies, as a large prime contractor, may engage small businesses as subcontractors, contributing indirectly to the small business ecosystem. The extent of such subcontracting would require further investigation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. Accountability measures are inherent in the Cost Plus Incentive Fee structure, which links contractor profit to performance. Transparency is generally maintained through contract awards databases, though detailed performance data may be limited.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

defense, department-of-defense, l3harris-technologies, electronic-warfare, jcrew, system-development, definitive-contract, cost-plus-incentive-fee, full-and-open-competition, new-jersey, 334511, counter-ied

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $84.1 million to L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR ALL MATERIAL AND SERVICES TO SUPPORT SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION PHASE THROUGH PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE THREE CAPABILITIES (DISMOUNTED, MOUNTED, AND FIXED SITE) OF THE JOINT COUNTER RADIO CONTROLLED IMPROVISED EXPLOSIVE DEVICE (RCIED) ELECTRONIC WARFARE (JCREW) 3.3 SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS 71 DEGREES CELSIUS AMBIENT TEMPERATURE.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $84.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-10-01. End: 2013-03-31.

What is L3Harris Technologies' track record with similar electronic warfare system development contracts?

L3Harris Technologies, Inc. (and its predecessor companies) has a significant history in developing and producing electronic warfare systems for the U.S. military. They have been involved in various programs related to signal intelligence, electronic attack, and electronic protection. Their experience likely includes developing complex systems with stringent performance requirements, similar to the JCREW program. A detailed review of their past performance on comparable contracts, including any past performance issues or successes, would provide further insight into their capability to execute this specific JCREW development contract effectively. This would involve examining contract awards, performance evaluations, and any associated litigation or disputes.

How does the $84.1 million award compare to the total lifecycle cost of the JCREW system?

The $84.1 million award represents the funding allocated for the System Development and Demonstration (SDD) phase through Preliminary Design Review (PDR) for the JCREW 3.3 system. This phase is typically one of the earlier, albeit significant, stages in a weapon system's lifecycle. The total lifecycle cost of the JCREW system would encompass not only development but also production, deployment, sustainment, and eventual disposal. Therefore, $84.1 million is a portion of the overall investment. Without data on the subsequent production and sustainment phases, it's impossible to determine the full lifecycle cost. However, development costs often represent a substantial upfront investment, and this figure provides a baseline for that initial phase.

What are the primary risks associated with the Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract type for this program?

The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract for a program like JCREW development revolve around cost control and contractor incentives. While CPIF aims to incentivize efficiency by sharing cost savings or overruns between the government and the contractor based on pre-defined targets, it can still lead to higher-than-expected costs if targets are not well-established or if the contractor prioritizes achieving incentive fees over true cost minimization. There's a risk that the contractor might incur costs to reach performance targets that drive higher incentive fees, potentially inflating the final price. Effective government oversight is crucial to ensure that the incentive structure genuinely benefits the program and taxpayers, rather than encouraging unnecessary spending.

What is the significance of the '71 degrees Celsius ambient temperature' requirement?

The requirement for the JCREW 3.3 system to operate at a '71 degrees Celsius ambient temperature' signifies a critical environmental performance parameter. This temperature is significantly above standard room temperature (around 20-25°C) and even typical operating temperatures in many climates. It indicates that the system is designed for harsh, high-temperature environments, such as those encountered in desert regions or within enclosed vehicle spaces where heat buildup is substantial. Meeting this requirement necessitates robust thermal management solutions, including advanced cooling systems, heat-resistant materials, and potentially specialized electronics designed to function reliably under extreme thermal stress. Failure to meet this specification could render the system inoperable or unreliable in its intended operational theaters.

How does the competition level (3 bidders) impact the potential for cost savings for the government?

Having three bidders in a full and open competition generally suggests a moderate level of competition. While more bidders typically lead to greater price pressure and potentially lower costs, three bidders still provide a basis for comparison and negotiation. It indicates that the market is not a monopoly or duopoly, allowing the government to select from multiple qualified sources. However, the effectiveness of this competition in driving down costs depends on factors such as the specificity of the requirements, the perceived market size, the barriers to entry for potential bidders, and the government's negotiation strategy. If the technology is highly specialized, three bidders might represent a significant portion of the available qualified sources, making the competition robust enough to yield reasonable prices.

Industry Classification

NAICS: ManufacturingNavigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments ManufacturingSearch, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTC – National Defense R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: N0002409R6303

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: L3harris Technologies, Inc

Address: 77 RIVER RD, CLIFTON, NJ, 07014

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $223,153,425

Exercised Options: $217,536,493

Current Obligation: $84,076,293

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline

Start Date: 2009-10-01

Current End Date: 2013-03-31

Potential End Date: 2013-03-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2023-08-16

More Contracts from L3harris Technologies, Inc.

View all L3harris Technologies, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending