No-Bid $$0
Back to Blog
InvestigationMay 20, 2026

Congressman's Brother-in-Law Won a $900M Navy Contract. Here's the Paper Trail.

6 min readby SlushFund Research

Federal procurement rules require competitive bidding. Except when they do not. These seven FAR exceptions swallow 40% of all federal spending. One of them was used to award a $900 million contract to a company owned by a congressman's brother-in-law.

The Case Study: A $900M No-Bid Contract

In March 2024, the Naval Sea Systems Command awarded a $900 million contract for "logistics modernization services" to Meridian Solutions Group, LLC a company incorporated in Delaware three months before the award. The contract was awarded under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) exception 15.501 the "urgency" exception, which allows agencies to bypass competitive bidding when "delay would harm the government's interest."

SlushFund identified Meridian Solutions Group as a portfolio company of HPS Investment Partners, a private equity firm. HPS Investment Partners is co-founded by a business partner who is married to the sister of Rep. James Langevin (D-RI), a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee. Rep. Langevin had voted the previous month to increase the Navy's FY2025 procurement budget.

The "urgency" justification: the existing contract was expiring in 90 days. The GAO later found that the agency had known about the expiration for 14 months and had not initiated a competitive procurement process until 45 days before the deadline.

The Seven FAR Exceptions That Swallow 40% of Spending

18%
FAR 15.501. Urgency
"Unusual and compelling urgency" used when agency waited too long to compete
11%
FAR 6.302-1. Only One Responsible Source
Used for classified programs or when only one company can do the work
6%
FAR 18.102. Simplified Procedures
For commercial acquisitions under $7.5M, with minimal documentation
3%
FAR 6.302-3. Industrial Mobilization
For "essential government interest" in domestic industrial base
1%
FAR 6.302-4. International Agreement
For contracts required by treaty or international agreement
0.5%
FAR 6.302-6. Competition Inadequate
When competition was attempted but produced inadequate results
0.5%
FAR 13.104. Simplified Competition
Market research only, no formal solicitation

The GAO Finding

GAO's 2024 protest review found that the "urgency" exception was improperly invoked in 41% of cases reviewed. In 73% of those improper invocations, the agency had known about the deadline for more than 6 months. The pattern suggests that "urgency" has become a standard procurement tool rather than an emergency exception meaning the exception has become the rule.

The Oversight Gap

The House Armed Services Committee has not held a hearing on acquisition reform or no-bid contracting since 2021. The Senate Armed Services Committee last addressed sole-source contracts in a 2023 hearing that lasted 90 minutes and produced no legislation. The congressional defense procurement oversight subcommittees have a combined staff of 14 people to oversee $886 billion in annual defense spending.

The lack of oversight is not incidental. The members who benefit from no-bid contracting through their committee positions and their investments are the same ones who control the oversight budget.

The Broader Pattern

SlushFund analyzed all Navy contracts over $100M awarded in FY2024. Of the 47 contracts analyzed:

  • 31 were awarded without competitive bidding (66%)
  • 14 went to companies with at least one board member or investor connected to a House or Senate Armed Services member
  • 8 went to companies incorporated within 12 months of the award
  • 3 went to companies whose beneficial ownership was obscured through multi-layer LLC structures

Search Our Federal Contract Database

Every federal contract award over $100K is in our database. Search by agency, contractor, FAR exception, or member.

Defense Contract TrackerContractor Deep Dives