Overpricing on Naval Nuclear Contract

NSIAD-85-92: Published: Sep 30, 1985. Publicly Released: Sep 30, 1985.

Additional Materials:


Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800

GAO evaluated the reasonableness of prices negotiated for two fixed-price incentive contracts the Department of Energy's (DOE) Pittsburgh and Schenectady Naval Reactors Offices awarded for nuclear reactor cores.

GAO found that some of the contract costs were questionable because: (1) DOE allowed a price escalation clause for certain materials in one contract to allow for inflation, but the contractor purchased the materials earlier than expected at the original price; (2) DOE allowed a subcontract with one of the contractor's subdivisions that included interdivision profits of over $3 million; (3) DOE should have written a formal justification for allowing the interdivision profits since its actions were contrary to procurement regulations then in force; (4) the contractor based labor costs for uranium recovery on only the final year of contract performance rather than on the entire life of the contract, which resulted in over $300,000 in excess costs; and (5) the contractor made computational errors in determining the cost of special tooling and subcontracted work that resulted in excess costs of about $11,000. GAO believes that DOE should negotiate a price adjustment to recover the costs associated with the costing errors.

Nov 7, 2018

Jun 28, 2018

Jun 21, 2018

Apr 3, 2018

Feb 6, 2018

Oct 12, 2017

Oct 2, 2017

  • budget icon, source: GAO

    U.S. Territories:

    Public Debt Outlook
    GAO-18-160: Published: Oct 2, 2017. Publicly Released: Oct 2, 2017.

Sep 20, 2017

May 3, 2017

Jan 18, 2017

Looking for more? Browse all our products here