NASA awards L3Harris Technologies $341M for GEOXO Imager instrument implementation through full and open competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $340,955,638 ($341.0M)
Contractor: L3harris Technologies, Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2023-03-23
End Date: 2050-06-30
Contract Duration: 9,961 days
Daily Burn Rate: $34.2K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: GEOXO IMAGER (GXI) INSTRUMENT IMPLEMENTATION
Place of Performance
Location: FORT WAYNE, ALLEN County, INDIANA, 46818
State: Indiana Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $341.0 million to L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. for work described as: GEOXO IMAGER (GXI) INSTRUMENT IMPLEMENTATION Key points: 1. Contract value of $341 million over a 10-year period suggests a significant investment in advanced imaging technology. 2. The use of a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type indicates a focus on performance incentives for the contractor. 3. The long duration of the contract (nearly 10 years) implies a need for sustained support and development. 4. The award was made under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 5. The contract's focus on instrument implementation points to a critical component of a larger space or Earth observation mission. 6. The primary agency and servicing agency are both NASA, indicating direct oversight and utilization of the instrument.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $341 million for a 10-year instrument implementation project appears reasonable given the complexity and specialized nature of space-based imaging technology. While direct comparisons are difficult without specific details on the instrument's capabilities and comparable projects, NASA's procurement history suggests a tendency towards significant investments in critical scientific instruments. The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure allows for flexibility and incentivizes contractor performance, which can lead to better value if managed effectively. Benchmarking against similar large-scale instrument development contracts would provide further insight, but the overall scale aligns with major aerospace procurements.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of two bids (no) suggests a competitive environment, though the exact number of interested parties and the rigor of the evaluation process would provide a clearer picture of the competition's intensity. A competitive process generally helps ensure fair pricing and encourages contractors to offer their best value propositions.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive bidding process as it typically drives down costs and ensures that the government receives the best possible value for its investment. It also promotes innovation by allowing multiple companies to vie for the contract.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA and the scientific community, who will gain access to data from the GEOXO Imager (GXI) instrument. The contract will deliver a critical instrument for Earth observation or space science missions, enabling advanced data collection and analysis. The geographic impact is global, as Earth observation data can inform climate science, disaster management, and resource monitoring worldwide. The contract supports high-tech jobs in the aerospace and engineering sectors, particularly within L3Harris Technologies and its potential subcontractors.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type can lead to cost overruns if performance metrics and award fee criteria are not meticulously defined and monitored.
- The long contract duration (nearly 10 years) increases the risk of scope creep or the need for contract modifications if mission requirements evolve significantly.
- Reliance on a single prime contractor, L3Harris Technologies, for such a critical instrument implementation carries inherent risks related to performance and delivery timelines.
Positive Signals
- Awarding under full and open competition suggests a thorough vetting of potential contractors and a commitment to achieving best value.
- The CPAF structure incentivizes contractor performance, potentially leading to higher quality outcomes and successful achievement of program objectives.
- NASA's extensive experience in managing complex aerospace procurements provides a strong foundation for oversight and risk mitigation.
Sector Analysis
The aerospace and defense sector is characterized by long development cycles, high R&D costs, and significant government investment. Contracts for space-based instruments, like the GEOXO Imager, are crucial for scientific research, national security, and commercial applications. The market is dominated by a few large, specialized contractors capable of meeting stringent technical requirements. NASA's spending in this area is substantial, often involving multi-year, high-value contracts for instrument development and integration, reflecting the complexity and criticality of space missions.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false) and the prime contractor is L3Harris Technologies, a large corporation. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses within this award notice. Therefore, the direct impact on small businesses is likely limited unless L3Harris actively engages them for specialized components or services. Further investigation into subcontracting goals would be necessary to assess the broader impact on the small business ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
NASA typically employs robust oversight mechanisms for its major procurements. This includes program management reviews, technical interchange meetings, and contract performance monitoring. The CPAF structure itself implies oversight through the evaluation of performance against defined criteria to determine award fees. Inspector General oversight may also be applicable, depending on the specific nature of the contract and any potential for fraud, waste, or abuse. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award notices and public reporting, though detailed internal reviews are not typically public.
Related Government Programs
- Earth Observing System
- Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) Program
- National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS)
- Weather and Climate Research Programs
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration increases risk of technological obsolescence and requirement changes.
- Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) requires diligent oversight to ensure cost control and fair incentive application.
- Dependence on a single contractor for a critical instrument implementation carries performance risk.
Tags
nasa, space-exploration, earth-observation, instrument-development, definitive-contract, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, aerospace, engineering-services, l3harris-technologies, indiana
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $341.0 million to L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.. GEOXO IMAGER (GXI) INSTRUMENT IMPLEMENTATION
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC..
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 $341.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2023-03-23. End: 2050-06-30.
What is the specific scientific or operational objective of the GEOXO Imager (GXI) instrument?
The GEOXO Imager (GXI) instrument is designed to provide advanced imaging capabilities for Earth observation from a geostationary orbit. Its primary objective is likely to enhance weather forecasting, climate monitoring, and disaster management by capturing high-resolution, frequent imagery of atmospheric and surface conditions. This could include improved tracking of severe weather events, detailed analysis of cloud patterns, and monitoring of environmental changes. The 'GEOXO' designation suggests it is part of a next-generation geostationary operational environmental satellite system, building upon previous missions to deliver more comprehensive and timely data critical for both scientific research and operational applications.
How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure influence contractor behavior and cost control for this contract?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract structure allows the contractor (L3Harris Technologies) to recover allowable costs plus a base fee, with the potential for an additional award fee based on performance against pre-defined criteria. This incentivizes the contractor to not only control costs but also to exceed performance expectations related to the GXI instrument's development and implementation. NASA will establish objective metrics for technical performance, schedule adherence, and quality. L3Harris will be motivated to meet or surpass these metrics to maximize its total compensation. Effective management by NASA is crucial to ensure the award fee criteria are challenging yet achievable, and that the evaluation process is fair and transparent, thereby driving the desired outcomes while managing financial risks.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or milestones NASA will use to evaluate L3Harris Technologies' performance under this contract?
While the specific KPIs and milestones are not detailed in the provided award notice, typical performance indicators for such a complex instrument implementation contract would likely include: successful completion of design reviews (e.g., Preliminary Design Review - PDR, Critical Design Review - CDR), on-time delivery of instrument components and subsystems, successful integration and testing of the GXI instrument, meeting stringent performance specifications (e.g., resolution, spectral range, signal-to-noise ratio), successful calibration and validation of the instrument's data, and adherence to safety and quality standards throughout the development and implementation phases. NASA's program office would meticulously track progress against these milestones to determine the award fee earned by L3Harris.
What is the historical spending trend for similar Earth observation instrument development contracts by NASA?
NASA's historical spending on Earth observation instrument development contracts varies significantly based on the complexity, technological advancement, and scope of the instruments. Major projects, such as those for the Earth Observing System (EOS) or the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) series, have involved hundreds of millions, and sometimes billions, of dollars over their development and implementation lifecycles. Contracts for individual advanced instruments, like the GXI, often fall in the range of $100 million to $500 million, spread over several years. The $341 million awarded to L3Harris for the GXI instrument aligns with the upper end of this range for a single, critical instrument, reflecting the sophisticated technology and long-term commitment required for geostationary observation systems.
What are the potential risks associated with the long duration (nearly 10 years) of this contract?
The nearly 10-year duration of the GEOXO Imager instrument implementation contract presents several potential risks. Firstly, technological obsolescence is a concern; advancements in imaging technology could occur during the contract period, potentially making the delivered instrument less cutting-edge by its operational deployment. Secondly, requirements volatility is high over such a long timeframe; the scientific or operational needs of NASA might evolve, necessitating costly contract modifications or scope changes. Thirdly, maintaining contractor focus and institutional knowledge over a decade can be challenging, potentially impacting performance consistency. Finally, long-term funding stability for the entire project duration, while planned for, always carries some level of risk due to shifting budgetary priorities or unforeseen economic conditions.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Space R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: 80GSFC22R0044
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 1919 W COOK RD, FORT WAYNE, IN, 46818
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $776,582,837
Exercised Options: $620,934,146
Current Obligation: $340,955,638
Actual Outlays: $279,480,478
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 146
Total Subaward Amount: $151,413,697
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2023-03-23
Current End Date: 2050-06-30
Potential End Date: 2050-06-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-01-14
More Contracts from L3harris Technologies, Inc.
- 200204!000024!5700!GV59 !esc/Ndk !F1962802C0010 !A!N! !N! !20020130!20020930!052819732!052819732!001216845!n!itt Industries, Inc , Systems !4410 E Fountain Blvd !colorado Sprin !co!80916!16000!041!08!colorado Springs !EL Paso !colorado !+000003175920!n!n!000519009204!j099!maint & Repair of Eq/Miscellaneous Equipment !A7 !electronics and Communication !3gwq!474l Bmews !541512!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !B! !a!n!r!2!002!b! !Z!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!d!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $2.2B (Department of Defense)
- THE Purpose of This Contract IS to Develop the Ground System That Will Support Noaa S Next Generation Geostationary Satellite Series, Goes-R. This NEW Series of Spacecraft, SET to Begin Launching in 2015, IS Expected to Double the Clarity of Today S Satellite Imagery and Provide AT Least 20 Times More Atmospheric Observations From Space. the Contractor IS to Design, Develop, Test and Implement the Goes-R Ground System. the Ground System Will Capture Data From the Goes-R Satellites, and Process and Distribute the Information to Operational Users — $1.8B (Department of Commerce)
- Requisition for MOD - Incrementally Funded - This PR Provides Funding for Ads-B National Contract Support for SBS Program Office — $1.3B (Department of Transportation)
- Award of Maintenance of Space Surveillence and Integrated Capabilities Contract — $1.2B (Department of Defense)
- TAS::80 0122::TAS Development, Manufacturing and Support to Weather Observing Instrument — $1.0B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
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 →