NASA awards $12.3M contract for X-59 Quiet Supersonic Technology aircraft community response testing
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $12,316,876 ($12.3M)
Contractor: Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2021-07-09
End Date: 2026-06-30
Contract Duration: 1,817 days
Daily Burn Rate: $6.8K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: COMMUNITY RESPONSE TESTING WITH THE X-59 QUIET SUPERSONIC TECHNOLOGY AIRCRAFT
Place of Performance
Location: BURLINGTON, MIDDLESEX County, MASSACHUSETTS, 01803
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $12.3 million to HARRIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON INC. for work described as: COMMUNITY RESPONSE TESTING WITH THE X-59 QUIET SUPERSONIC TECHNOLOGY AIRCRAFT Key points: 1. Contract focuses on crucial research and development for advanced aerospace technology. 2. Competition was full and open, suggesting a robust market for these specialized services. 3. The contract duration of over 1800 days indicates a long-term commitment to the project's success. 4. Performance is tied to a Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure, common in R&D where final costs can be uncertain. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541715 points to significant R&D investment. 6. The contract is a delivery order under a larger agreement, implying a phased approach to funding and execution.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $12.3 million for community response testing of the X-59 aircraft appears reasonable given the specialized nature of the research and development involved. While direct comparisons are difficult without more specific project details, R&D contracts of this scope often involve significant investment in expertise, technology, and testing infrastructure. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure is typical for R&D where project scope and costs can evolve, allowing for flexibility while providing the contractor with a defined profit margin. Benchmarking against similar aerospace R&D projects would provide further insight into value for money.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple capable vendors had the opportunity to bid. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this procurement method generally fosters competitive pricing and encourages innovation by allowing the government to select the best value offering. The open competition suggests a healthy market for specialized aerospace research and development services.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it typically leads to more competitive pricing and ensures that the government is not overpaying for services. It also increases the likelihood of selecting a contractor with the most suitable capabilities and innovative solutions.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the broader aerospace industry, advancing the development of supersonic flight technology. The services delivered include critical community response testing, which will inform future regulations and public acceptance of supersonic aircraft. The geographic impact is primarily national, focusing on research conducted within the United States, but the findings have global implications for aviation. Workforce implications include employment for highly skilled engineers, scientists, and technicians involved in aerospace research and testing.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type can lead to cost overruns if not closely managed, as the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs plus a fixed fee.
- The long contract duration (over 1800 days) necessitates sustained oversight to ensure continued alignment with project goals and budget.
- The specialized nature of supersonic technology may limit the pool of qualified contractors, potentially impacting future competition.
- Reliance on a single delivery order under a potentially larger contract vehicle requires understanding the overall scope and funding of the parent contract.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process that likely secured favorable terms.
- The contract supports cutting-edge research and development in a strategically important aerospace sector.
- The project's focus on community response testing is crucial for the safe and acceptable integration of future supersonic aircraft.
- The fixed fee component in the CPFF structure provides some cost predictability for the government once the fee is established.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on aerospace engineering and physical sciences. The market for supersonic technology R&D is highly specialized, involving a limited number of advanced aerospace firms and research institutions. NASA's investment in the X-59 program aims to overcome the environmental and regulatory hurdles associated with supersonic flight, potentially opening a new era in commercial aviation. Comparable spending benchmarks would likely be found within other large-scale, government-funded aerospace R&D initiatives.
Small Business Impact
The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions for this contract, nor does it detail subcontracting plans. Given the highly specialized nature of supersonic aircraft research and development, it is possible that prime contracting opportunities are concentrated among larger, established aerospace firms. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses are involved in the supply chain or as subcontractors.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract is likely managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be embedded within the contract's performance work statement, milestones, and reporting requirements. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and public reporting, although specific details of ongoing R&D may be sensitive. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- Advanced Aerospace Vehicle Research
- Supersonic Flight Technology Development
- Aviation Noise Reduction Research
- Aerospace Materials Science
- Community Engagement in Technology Development
Risk Flags
- Cost Overrun Potential (CPFF)
- Schedule Slippage Risk
- Data Integrity in Testing
- Public Perception Management
Tags
research-and-development, aerospace, nasa, supersonic-aircraft, community-testing, full-and-open-competition, cost-plus-fixed-fee, delivery-order, massachusetts, federal-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $12.3 million to HARRIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON INC.. COMMUNITY RESPONSE TESTING WITH THE X-59 QUIET SUPERSONIC TECHNOLOGY AIRCRAFT
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is HARRIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON 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 $12.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2021-07-09. End: 2026-06-30.
What is the track record of HARRIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON INC. with NASA and similar R&D contracts?
HARRIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON INC. (HMMH) is a well-established acoustics and environmental consulting firm with extensive experience in aviation noise. While specific contract details with NASA for R&D are not immediately available in this summary, HMMH has a significant history of working with government agencies, including the FAA, on noise-related studies and environmental impact assessments for aviation projects. Their expertise in acoustics makes them a logical choice for a project focused on the community response to supersonic aircraft noise. A deeper dive into NASA's contract database and HMMH's past performance reviews would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their track record specifically related to large-scale aerospace R&D and their performance on similar government contracts.
How does the $12.3 million contract value compare to other NASA R&D investments in advanced aviation?
The $12.3 million contract value for community response testing of the X-59 aircraft is a significant but not exceptionally large sum within the context of major aerospace R&D programs. NASA's budget for aeronautics research often includes multi-year, multi-million dollar initiatives for developing new technologies. For instance, the broader X-59 Quiet Supersonic Technology project itself represents a substantial investment. When compared to the development of entirely new aircraft platforms or propulsion systems, this specific contract for testing appears to be a focused investment on a critical aspect of technology validation. Benchmarking against specific line items for similar testing phases in past NASA aeronautics projects would offer a more precise comparison of its relative scale and value.
What are the primary risks associated with this community response testing contract?
The primary risks associated with this contract revolve around the effectiveness and objectivity of the community response testing itself. One key risk is potential bias in participant selection or data collection, which could skew the results regarding public perception of the aircraft's noise. Another risk is the technical challenge of accurately measuring and correlating perceived noise levels with actual community reactions, especially in diverse environments. Furthermore, managing public expectations and ensuring transparent communication throughout the testing process is critical to avoid misinformation or distrust. Finally, unforeseen environmental factors or logistical challenges during the testing phases could impact the schedule and cost, although the CPFF structure offers some flexibility.
How effective is the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure for managing R&D projects like this?
The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure is often employed for R&D projects where the scope of work and final costs are inherently uncertain. Its effectiveness lies in providing the contractor with reimbursement for all allowable costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee representing their profit. This structure incentivizes the contractor to control costs, as the fee remains constant regardless of the final project expenditure. However, it also requires robust government oversight to ensure that costs are reasonable and allowable, and that the contractor is making efficient progress. For a project like the X-59 community testing, where unforeseen technical or logistical issues might arise, CPFF offers flexibility to adapt while maintaining a defined profit margin for the contractor, making it a suitable, albeit closely monitored, choice.
What are the historical spending patterns for NASA's aeronautics research and development programs?
NASA's aeronautics research and development programs have historically received significant, though fluctuating, portions of the agency's budget. Funding levels are often influenced by national priorities, technological advancements, and the perceived economic or strategic benefits of aerospace innovation. Major historical investments have included supersonic and hypersonic research, advanced air traffic management systems, and sustainable aviation technologies. Spending patterns typically involve large, multi-year contracts for fundamental research, technology demonstration, and prototype development, often awarded through competitive processes. The X-59 program aligns with a long-standing NASA objective to advance aviation capabilities, suggesting continued investment in such forward-looking R&D initiatives.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology)
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: LARC20R0004
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 700 DISTRICT AVE STE 800, BURLINGTON, MA, 01803
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Economically Disadvantaged Women Owned Small Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $12,316,876
Exercised Options: $12,316,876
Current Obligation: $12,316,876
Actual Outlays: $11,587,132
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: 80LARC21DA001
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2021-07-09
Current End Date: 2026-06-30
Potential End Date: 2026-06-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-03-23
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 →