NASA awards $2.7M for Ground Recording Systems, with Crystal Instruments Corporation securing the contract
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $2,735,615 ($2.7M)
Contractor: Crystal Instruments Corporation
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2021-02-19
End Date: 2026-04-30
Contract Duration: 1,896 days
Daily Burn Rate: $1.4K/day
Competition Type: COMPETED UNDER SAP
Number of Offers Received: 9
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: GROUND RECORDING SYSTEM (GRS)
Place of Performance
Location: SANTA CLARA, SANTA CLARA County, CALIFORNIA, 95054
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $2.7 million to CRYSTAL INSTRUMENTS CORPORATION for work described as: GROUND RECORDING SYSTEM (GRS) Key points: 1. Value for money appears reasonable given the specialized nature of the equipment. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a single awardee, raising questions about price discovery. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, with contract duration and fixed-price terms. 4. Performance context is tied to NASA's need for electrical signal measurement. 5. Sector positioning is within specialized scientific instrumentation manufacturing.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $2.7 million for a Ground Recording System (GRS) appears within a reasonable range for specialized scientific instrumentation. Benchmarking against similar, highly technical equipment purchases is challenging due to the niche nature of the GRS. However, the fixed-price contract type suggests that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for value.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
This contract was competed under Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP), which typically involves a limited number of bidders. While the specific number of proposals received isn't detailed, the 'COMPETED UNDER SAP' designation suggests it was not a full and open competition. This approach is often used for procurements below certain dollar thresholds to expedite the process, but it may limit the breadth of competition and potentially impact price competitiveness.
Taxpayer Impact: Limited competition under SAP may result in less aggressive pricing compared to a full and open competition, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers.
Public Impact
NASA benefits from the acquisition of essential testing and measurement equipment. The GRS will be used for measuring and testing electricity and electrical signals. The geographic impact is primarily at NASA facilities where the system will be deployed. Workforce implications are likely related to the operation and maintenance of the GRS.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Limited competition could lead to suboptimal pricing.
- Reliance on a single awardee for specialized equipment may pose supply chain risks.
Positive Signals
- Fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
- Contract duration provides stability for NASA's testing needs.
Sector Analysis
The contract falls within the scientific and electrical testing instrumentation sector. This market is characterized by specialized manufacturers catering to research, development, and quality control needs across various industries, including aerospace. Spending in this sector is driven by technological advancements and the need for precise measurement capabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the highly specific nature of Ground Recording Systems.
Small Business Impact
There is no indication that this contract included a small business set-aside. The award to Crystal Instruments Corporation, a firm, does not explicitly detail its size status. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses are not specified in the provided data, and the overall impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal unless Crystal Instruments actively engages them.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by NASA's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified goods. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, where basic award information is publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Electrical Measurement and Testing Equipment
- Scientific Instrumentation Procurement
Risk Flags
- Limited Competition
- Potential for Price Escalation
- Sole Source Dependency Risk
Tags
nasa, instrument-manufacturing, electrical-signals, ground-recording-system, crystal-instruments-corporation, california, competed-under-sap, purchase-order, firm-fixed-price, r&d, scientific-instrumentation
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $2.7 million to CRYSTAL INSTRUMENTS CORPORATION. GROUND RECORDING SYSTEM (GRS)
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is CRYSTAL INSTRUMENTS CORPORATION.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (National Aeronautics and Space Administration).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $2.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2021-02-19. End: 2026-04-30.
What is the track record of Crystal Instruments Corporation with federal contracts?
Crystal Instruments Corporation has a history of federal contract awards, primarily with agencies like NASA and the Department of Defense. These awards often pertain to vibration testing equipment, data acquisition systems, and related instrumentation. Reviewing past performance on similar contracts would provide insight into their reliability, quality of products, and adherence to delivery schedules. Analyzing the volume and value of their federal awards can indicate their established presence and capabilities within the government contracting landscape. A deeper dive into contract close-out data and any past performance evaluations would offer a more comprehensive understanding of their track record.
How does the awarded price compare to similar GRS procurements?
Direct comparison of the $2.7 million award for this Ground Recording System (GRS) to similar procurements is challenging due to the specialized nature of the equipment and the limited public data available on niche scientific instruments. GRS units can vary significantly in functionality, capacity, and precision, impacting their cost. Factors such as the inclusion of software, calibration services, training, and warranty periods also influence the total price. Without detailed specifications of comparable systems and their award values, a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult. However, the fixed-price nature of this contract suggests a defined cost expectation at the outset.
What are the primary risks associated with this contract?
The primary risks associated with this contract include potential technical obsolescence of the Ground Recording System (GRS) over its operational life, given the rapid pace of technological advancement in measurement and testing equipment. Another risk is the reliance on a single supplier, Crystal Instruments Corporation, which could lead to challenges in future support, upgrades, or replacements if the company's market position changes. Furthermore, while the contract is fixed-price, there's always a residual risk of performance issues or delivery delays, although the fixed-price structure incentivizes the contractor to mitigate these. The limited competition also presents a risk of less competitive pricing over the long term.
How effective is the Ground Recording System likely to be for NASA's needs?
The effectiveness of the Ground Recording System (GRS) for NASA's needs is contingent on its technical specifications meeting the precise requirements for measuring and testing electricity and electrical signals. Assuming the system was procured based on a well-defined Statement of Work and that Crystal Instruments Corporation has a solid reputation for delivering reliable instrumentation, the system is likely to be effective. NASA's rigorous procurement process typically involves detailed technical evaluations to ensure procured equipment aligns with mission-critical functions. The system's effectiveness will ultimately be measured by its ability to provide accurate, reliable data crucial for NASA's research and operational activities.
What are the historical spending patterns for similar instrumentation at NASA?
Historical spending patterns for similar instrumentation at NASA indicate a consistent investment in advanced measurement and testing equipment to support its diverse research and development activities. NASA frequently procures specialized systems for data acquisition, signal processing, and environmental testing. While specific dollar amounts for 'Ground Recording Systems' are not readily available as a distinct category in public databases, spending on related areas like electronic test equipment, sensors, and data loggers runs into tens of millions of dollars annually across the agency. These procurements are often characterized by high unit costs due to the advanced technology and stringent reliability requirements inherent in aerospace applications.
What is the potential impact of limited competition on future procurements?
The limited competition under Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP) for this $2.7 million contract could have a notable impact on future procurements. If Crystal Instruments Corporation is the primary or sole provider of this specific type of GRS, future needs might default to them, potentially without the benefit of competitive bidding. This could lead to higher prices in subsequent awards if market conditions do not change or if alternative solutions are not actively sought. Agencies often face a trade-off between the speed and efficiency of SAP and the potential for better pricing and innovation that a broader competition might yield.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing › Instrument Manufacturing for Measuring and Testing Electricity and Electrical Signals
Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: COMPETED UNDER SAP
Solicitation Procedures: SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION
Solicitation ID: 80AFRC20Q0012
Offers Received: 9
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 2370 OWEN ST, SANTA CLARA, CA, 95054
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $4,466,025
Exercised Options: $2,735,615
Current Obligation: $2,735,615
Actual Outlays: $1,664,040
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES
Timeline
Start Date: 2021-02-19
Current End Date: 2026-04-30
Potential End Date: 2026-04-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-03-03
Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts
- International Space Station — $22.4B (THE Boeing Company)
- TAS::80 0124::TAS Design, Development, Test&evaluation of Project Orion — $15.5B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- Provide Developmental Hardware and Test Articles, and Manufacture and Assemble Ares I Upper Stages. the Upper Stage (US) Element IS an Integral Part of the Ares I Launch Vehicle and Provides the Second Stage of Flight. the US Element IS Responsible for the Roll Control During the First Stage Burn and Separation; and Will Provide the Guidance and Navigation, Command and Data Handling, and Other Avionics Functions for the Ares I During ALL Phases of the Ascent Flight. the US Element IS a NEW Design That Emphasizes Safety, Operability, and Minimum Life Cycle Cost. the Overall Design, Development, Test and Evaluation (ddt&e), Production, and Sustaining Engineering Efforts Include Activities Performed by Three Organizations; the Nasa Design Team (NDT), the Upper Stage Production Contractor (uspc) and the Instrument Unit Production Contractor (iupc). for Clarity, the Uspc Will BE Referred to AS the Contractor Throughout This Document. Nasa IS Responsible for the Integration of the Primary Elements of the Ares I Launch Vehicle Including: the First Stage, US Including Instrument Unit (IU), and US Engine; and Will Also Integrate the Ares I Launch Vehicle AT the Launch Site. Nasa IS Responsible for the Ddt&e, Including Technical and Programmatic Integration of the US Subsystems and Government-Furnished Property. Nasa Will Lead the Effort to Develop the Requirements and Specifications of the US Element, the Development Plan and Testing Requirements, and ALL Design Documentation, Initial Manufacturing and Assembly Process Planning, Logistics Planning, and Operations Support Planning. Development, Qualification, and Acceptance Testing Will BE Conducted by Nasa and the Contractor to Satisfy Requirements and for Risk Mitigation. Nasa IS Responsible for the Overall Upper Stage Verification and Validation Process and Will Require Support From the Contractor. the Contractor IS Responsible for the Manufacture and Assembly of the Upper Stage Test Flight and Operational Upper Stage Units Including the Installation of Upper Stage Instrument Unit, the Government-Furnished US Engine, Booster Separation Motors, and Other Government-Furnished Property. a Description of the Nasa Managed and Performed Efforts IS Contained in the US Work Packages and Will BE Made Available to the Contractor to Ensure Their Understanding of the Roles and Responsibilities of the NDT, Iupc, and Contractor During the Design, Development, and Operation of the US Element. the US Conceptual Design Described in the Uso-Clv-Se-25704 US Design Definition Document (DDD) IS the Baseline Design for This Contract. the Contractors Early Role Will BE to Provide Producibility Engineering Support to Nasa VIA the Established US Office Structure and to Provide Inputs Into the Final Design Configuration, Specifications, and Standards. Nasa Will Transition the Manufacturing and Assembly, Logistics Support Infrastructure, Configuration Management, and the Sustaining Engineering Functions to the Contractor AT the KEY Points During the Development and Implementation of the Program Currently Planned to Occur NO Later Than 90 Days After the Completion of the Following Major Milestones: Manufacturing and Assembly US Preliminary Design Review (PDR) Logistics Support Infrastructure US PDR Configuration Management US Critical Design Review CDR) Sustaining Engineering US Design Certification Review (DCR) After the Completion of an Orderly Transition of Roles and Responsibilities to the Contractor, Nasa Will Assume an Insight Role Into the Contractors Production, Sustaining Engineering, and Operations Support of the Ares I US Test Program and Flight Hardware. After DCR, the Contractor Will BE Responsible for Sustaining Engineering PER SOW Section 4.7, AS Necessary to Maintain and Support the US Configuration and for Production and Operations Support — $10.5B (THE Boeing Company)
- Space Program Operations Contract (spoc) — $8.5B (United Space Alliance, LLC)
- Joint Us/Russian Human Space Flight Activities — $4.7B (Russia Space Agency)
View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →