A $7.6 billion contract that ended five days ago — the older the ending, the less the record says
A Navy contract signed in 2004 and closed on 31 August 2026, obligating about $7.63 billion. It is the most recent ending in the records kept here: the description is empty, but the outlay field holds a number.
Contract key facts
- RecipientBoeing
- Contract value$7,633,729,889 (≈$7.63B)
- BranchNavy
- Awarding agencyDepartment of Defense
- Awarding sub-agencyDepartment of the Navy
- Award typeDEFINITIVE CONTRACT
- Period of performance2004-06-29 〜 2026-08-31
- Contract ID (PIID)N0001904C3146
Key points
- Signed by the Department of the Navy on 29 June 2004 and closed on 31 August 2026 for about $7.63 billion.
- It is the most recent ending among the records this site holds as of 2026-09-05.
- The description is empty, yet the outlay field holds about $7.76 million, 0.1% of the obligation.
- Among contracts that ended by 2016, 5.9% carry an outlay figure; among those ending from 2024, 54.8% do.
1The most recent ending
Through the previous article the endings ranged from 2005 to 2024. This contract closed on 31 August 2026, five days before the 2026-09-05 as-of date used throughout this series.
2When a contract ended changes how much its record says
Of the 208 Defense Department contracts this site holds as of 2026-09-05, 103 are past their end date. Grouping those by when they ended and asking how many carry a positive outlay figure shows a clear gradient:
The older the ending, the emptier the outlay field. Among the 17 that ended by 2016, one record (5.9%) carries a figure; among the 31 that ended from 2024 onward, seventeen (54.8%) do. The gap describes how far back the record-keeping reaches, not whether money moved.
3What the eight records showed
- 1The ending is not always singleOne contract can hold two different pairs of dates
- 2Zero and blank mean the sameNeither says anything about payment
- 3The description cannot be relied onTEST, BASIC CONTRACT and blank all appear
- 4Machine-facing text bleeds inSome descriptions still carry an accounting prefix
- 5Not everything is equipmentServices such as health care sit in the department-wide category
- 6A number does not mean a large ratioAcross the 41 positive records the median is 0.35%
- 7Description quality is separateOne field can be strong while another stays thin
- 8How much is said depends on when it endedOlder endings leave quieter records
Why it matters
Records of finished contracts thin out the further back the ending lies. Analysis of past procurement should avoid reading a gap as an absence of activity, and should use obligated amounts when comparing scale.
FAQ
Why is the outlay field emptier for older contracts?
Can the subject be identified when the description is empty?
Will records of finished contracts still be updated?
Sources (primary)
This article is an independent organization based on the U.S. official spending data below. Verify the exact, latest details with the official source.
- USAspending (award details)
- Contract ID (PIID)：N0001904C3146