NASA awards Northrop Grumman $284.7M for EOS Common Spacecraft development, spanning over a decade
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $284,685,470 ($284.7M)
Contractor: Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 1999-10-15
End Date: 2010-07-31
Contract Duration: 3,942 days
Daily Burn Rate: $72.2K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE PERSONNEL, MATERIALS, AND FACILITIES, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR IN THIS CONTRACT, NECESSARY TO DESIGN, DEVELOP, FABRICATE, INTEGRATE, TEST, AND OPERATE THE EOS COMMON SPACECRAFT. IN ADDITION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL ITEMS/SERVICES REQUIRED BY THIS CONTRACT.
Place of Performance
Location: REDONDO BEACH, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 90278
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $284.7 million to NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION for work described as: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE PERSONNEL, MATERIALS, AND FACILITIES, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR IN THIS CONTRACT, NECESSARY TO DESIGN, DEVELOP, FABRICATE, INTEGRATE, TEST, AND OPERATE THE EOS COMMON SPACECRAFT. IN ADDITION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL ITEMS/SERVICES… Key points: 1. Significant investment in a long-term, complex spacecraft development project. 2. Sole contractor, Northrop Grumman, suggests potential for limited competition or specialized expertise. 3. High value contract with inherent risks associated with R&D and long project timelines. 4. Focus on physical, engineering, and life sciences R&D indicates a critical scientific or operational objective.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The contract value of $284.7M over 11 years is substantial. Without specific benchmarks for similar complex spacecraft development, assessing its value is difficult. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure implies performance incentives, but the ultimate cost-effectiveness depends heavily on achieving program milestones.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
Although listed as 'full and open competition,' the long duration and specialized nature of developing a common spacecraft may have limited the number of actual bidders. The contract type (Cost Plus Award Fee) allows for flexibility but can lead to higher costs if not managed tightly.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayer funds are supporting advanced space technology development. The long-term nature and R&D focus mean the immediate return on investment is not tangible, but potential future benefits could be significant.
Public Impact
Development of critical space infrastructure for Earth observation. Potential for advancements in scientific understanding and environmental monitoring. Long-term government commitment to a complex technological undertaking. Job creation and economic activity within the aerospace sector.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Long contract duration increases risk of cost overruns and scope creep.
- Cost Plus Award Fee structure can incentivize higher spending.
- Lack of small business participation noted.
- Sole contractor for a critical component may indicate limited market competition.
Positive Signals
- Supports advanced R&D in physical, engineering, and life sciences.
- Potential for significant scientific and operational advancements.
- Definitive contract provides a framework for long-term project execution.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls under Research and Development in Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (NAICS 541710). Spending in this sector is often characterized by high upfront investment, long development cycles, and significant technological risk, with outcomes aimed at innovation and future capabilities.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates this contract was not awarded to small businesses (sb: false). This is common for large, complex aerospace development projects that require extensive resources and specialized capabilities typically held by larger corporations.
Oversight & Accountability
The long duration and cost-plus nature of this contract necessitate robust oversight from NASA to ensure cost control, adherence to schedule, and achievement of performance objectives. Regular reviews and audits would be crucial for accountability.
Related Government Programs
- Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracting
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration Programs
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration (1999-2010) increases risk.
- Cost Plus Award Fee (PT) can lead to higher costs.
- No small business participation.
- High value contract for R&D carries inherent uncertainty.
- Potential for limited competition despite 'full and open' designation.
Tags
research-and-development-in-the-physical, national-aeronautics-and-space-administr, ca, definitive-contract, 100m-plus
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $284.7 million to NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE PERSONNEL, MATERIALS, AND FACILITIES, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR IN THIS CONTRACT, NECESSARY TO DESIGN, DEVELOP, FABRICATE, INTEGRATE, TEST, AND OPERATE THE EOS COMMON SPACECRAFT. IN ADDITION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL ITEMS/SERVICES REQUIRED BY THIS CONTRACT.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS 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 $284.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 1999-10-15. End: 2010-07-31.
What specific technological advancements or scientific discoveries are anticipated from the EOS Common Spacecraft, and how will their realization be measured?
The EOS Common Spacecraft is intended to support Earth observation missions, likely involving advanced sensor technology and data collection capabilities. Measuring realization would involve tracking the successful integration and operation of these systems, the quality and quantity of data acquired, and the scientific publications or operational applications derived from that data. Specific metrics would be detailed in the contract's performance work statement.
Given the Cost Plus Award Fee structure and the long duration, what mechanisms are in place to mitigate the risk of cost overruns and ensure efficient use of taxpayer funds?
NASA employs several mechanisms, including detailed performance metrics, milestone-based award fees, and potentially independent cost reviews. Regular program reviews, audits, and stringent contract management are essential to monitor spending against progress. The award fee structure itself is designed to incentivize efficiency and performance, but effective oversight is paramount to prevent excessive costs.
How does the development of a 'common' spacecraft impact future mission flexibility and the potential for technological obsolescence compared to bespoke designs?
A common spacecraft design aims for standardization, potentially reducing development time and cost for future missions by leveraging existing architecture. However, it could also lead to inflexibility if specific mission requirements deviate significantly from the common design. Technological obsolescence is a risk for any long-term project; a common design might be updated incrementally, but a truly novel requirement could necessitate a new platform.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Space R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Northrop Grumman Corporation (UEI: 967356127)
Address: 1 SPACE PARK BLVD, REDONDO BEACH, CA, 90278
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $31,076,695
Exercised Options: $31,076,695
Current Obligation: $284,685,470
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Timeline
Start Date: 1999-10-15
Current End Date: 2010-07-31
Potential End Date: 2010-07-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2016-09-23
More Contracts from Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
- 200506!000026!5700!fa8214!oo-Alc/Pkme/Lmke !F4261098C0001 !A!N! !Y! !p01502!20041213!20050701!001563738!004179453!016435559!n!northrop Grumman Space & Missi!888 S 2000 E !clearfield !ut!84015!13850!011!49!clearfield !davis !utah !-000001960000!n!n!000000000000!l014!tech REP Svcs/Guided Missiles !A2 !missile and Space Systems !302 !minuteman III GRP !541330!E! !3! ! !C! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !a!n!l!2!002!b! !Z!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $10.0B (Department of Defense)
- E-2D Advanced Hawkeye Aircraft (FRP-7) — $8.5B (Department of Defense)
- E-2D Advanced Hawkeye Aircraft (FRP-2) — $5.4B (Department of Defense)
- First DDT and E, Ares I-X, and Flight Tests. First Stage Will BE a Five Segment, Solid Rocket Booster Derived From the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) Solid Rocket Booster (srb)/Reusable Solid Rocket Motor (rsrm). the Contractor Shall Furnish the Necessary Management, Engineering, Labor, Facilities, Tools, Equipment, and Materials Required for First Stage Development, Qualification, Certification and Acceptance Program. Activities Include: Redesign and Testing of the Motor to Incorporate the Fifth Segment and Production of Five Full Scale Ground Static Test Motors: TWO Development Motors (dms)-And Three Qualification Motors (QMS); Structural Test Article (STA), Ground Vibration Test Motors (gvtms) and Other Development Testing; Redesign of the Avionics, Deceleration, Separation, and Flight Termination System (FTS) Subsystems; Ares I-X: Simulated Ares I Outer Mold Line/Mass Properties Using Modified Srb/Rsrm; and Three Flight Test Vehicles. TAS::80 0124::TAS — $4.4B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Federal Contract — $4.4B (Department of Defense)
View all Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation federal contracts →
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 →