NASA awards $997K to Aerojet Rocketdyne for propulsion tech development over 7 years
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $9,971,626 ($10.0M)
Contractor: Aerojet Rocketdyne, Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2002-11-06
End Date: 2009-12-14
Contract Duration: 2,595 days
Daily Burn Rate: $3.8K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 999
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: MULTIPLE PR#'S FOR THIS ACTION 4200000791 & 4200000899 DEVELOPMENT OF TECH ELEMENTS OF NASA
Place of Performance
Location: REDMOND, KING County, WASHINGTON, 98052
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $10.0 million to AEROJET ROCKETDYNE, INC. for work described as: MULTIPLE PR#'S FOR THIS ACTION 4200000791 & 4200000899 DEVELOPMENT OF TECH ELEMENTS OF NASA Key points: 1. Contract value represents a modest investment in critical space technology. 2. Aerojet Rocketdyne is a key player in the aerospace propulsion market. 3. Long contract duration suggests a need for sustained development and testing. 4. Cost-plus-fixed-fee structure allows for flexibility but requires careful oversight. 5. Focus on propulsion units indicates a strategic investment in space exploration capabilities.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The total award of $997,162 over nearly seven years averages to approximately $142,451 annually. This figure appears modest for the development of advanced propulsion technology, suggesting either a focused scope or that this award represents a portion of a larger program. Benchmarking against similar R&D contracts in aerospace propulsion is difficult without more detailed scope information, but the per-year investment seems low for cutting-edge development.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple companies had the opportunity to bid. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this competitive approach is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers. The use of full and open competition suggests that NASA sought the best available technology and pricing.
Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of obtaining the best value and potentially lower prices through market forces.
Public Impact
Benefits NASA's space exploration and defense initiatives by advancing propulsion technology. Services delivered include the development of critical technological elements for space vehicles. Geographic impact is primarily within the aerospace industry, with potential for broader technological spin-offs. Workforce implications include specialized engineering and technical roles within Aerojet Rocketdyne and potentially NASA.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts can lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently.
- The long duration of the contract requires sustained oversight to ensure progress and prevent scope creep.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process.
- Aerojet Rocketdyne is an established entity in the aerospace propulsion sector.
- The contract focuses on a critical technology area for space exploration.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Propulsion Unit and Propulsion Unit Parts Manufacturing sector. This is a highly specialized area within the broader aerospace industry, characterized by significant R&D investment, long development cycles, and stringent performance requirements. The market is dominated by a few key players, including Aerojet Rocketdyne, due to the high barriers to entry and specialized expertise required.
Small Business Impact
There is no indication that this contract involved small business set-asides. As a sole-source or prime contract with a large, established aerospace firm, the primary impact on small businesses would likely be through subcontracting opportunities. The extent of these opportunities would depend on Aerojet Rocketdyne's subcontracting plan and the specific technological components required.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this cost-plus-fixed-fee contract would typically involve NASA's contracting officers and technical representatives monitoring progress, costs, and adherence to the fixed fee. Accountability measures are built into the contract's milestones and deliverables. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed project progress reports may be considered sensitive.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Aerospace Propulsion Systems
- Guided Missile Manufacturing
- Space Vehicle Components
Risk Flags
- Cost Overrun Potential
- Scope Creep Risk
- Long-Term Project Management
Tags
nasa, aerojet-rocketdyne, aerospace, propulsion-systems, research-and-development, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, guided-missile-manufacturing, space-vehicle-manufacturing, washington, defense-contracting
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $10.0 million to AEROJET ROCKETDYNE, INC.. MULTIPLE PR#'S FOR THIS ACTION 4200000791 & 4200000899 DEVELOPMENT OF TECH ELEMENTS OF NASA
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is AEROJET ROCKETDYNE, 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 $10.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2002-11-06. End: 2009-12-14.
What is Aerojet Rocketdyne's track record with NASA on similar propulsion development contracts?
Aerojet Rocketdyne has a long and extensive history of working with NASA and the Department of Defense on various propulsion systems, including solid rocket motors, liquid rocket engines, and related technologies. Their track record includes contributions to major space programs like the Space Shuttle, Mars missions, and various satellite deployments. While specific performance metrics for past contracts are not detailed here, their continued selection for critical propulsion work suggests a generally positive performance history and established expertise. However, like many large defense contractors, they have also faced scrutiny and contract disputes on occasion, underscoring the need for diligent oversight on all awards.
How does the $997,162 award compare to typical R&D spending for advanced propulsion systems?
The total award of $997,162 over nearly seven years, averaging around $142,451 annually, appears modest for the development of advanced propulsion systems. Major propulsion development programs, especially those involving new technologies or significant upgrades, often involve hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. This award might represent a specific, focused research effort, a component of a larger program, or early-stage feasibility studies. Without more context on the specific technological elements being developed, it's challenging to make a definitive comparison, but it is significantly lower than typical large-scale engine development contracts.
What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for technology development?
The primary risks with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract, like this one, revolve around cost control and contractor incentive. While the fixed fee provides the contractor with a defined profit margin, the 'cost-plus' aspect means the government bears the risk of actual costs incurred. If costs escalate beyond initial estimates due to unforeseen technical challenges, scope creep, or inefficient management by the contractor, the government pays more. The contractor's incentive is to complete the work within the estimated cost to maximize their fee, but there's less inherent pressure to minimize costs compared to fixed-price contracts. Diligent government oversight is crucial to manage these risks effectively.
What is the strategic importance of developing new guided missile and space vehicle propulsion units for NASA?
The development of advanced propulsion units is strategically vital for NASA's core missions. Enhanced propulsion capabilities enable deeper space exploration, faster transit times to celestial bodies, and the ability to carry heavier payloads. For guided missiles, advancements in propulsion directly impact range, speed, maneuverability, and payload capacity, which are critical for national security. Investing in this area ensures the U.S. maintains a technological edge in both space exploration and defense, supporting scientific discovery, economic opportunities, and global security.
How has NASA's spending on propulsion technology development evolved over the past decade?
NASA's spending on propulsion technology development has fluctuated over the past decade, influenced by shifting program priorities, budget allocations, and technological advancements. Significant investments have been directed towards programs like the Space Launch System (SLS) and commercial crew/cargo initiatives, which inherently require advanced propulsion. There's also a continuous push for more efficient, sustainable, and powerful propulsion systems for deep space missions, including research into electric propulsion, nuclear thermal propulsion, and advanced chemical rockets. While specific aggregate figures require detailed analysis of NASA's budget justifications, the trend generally shows sustained, albeit variable, investment in this critical area.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Propulsion Unit and Propulsion Unit Parts Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Space R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 999
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings, Inc. (UEI: 001316330)
Address: 11411 139TH PL NE, REDMOND, WA, 01
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $9,971,626
Exercised Options: $9,971,626
Current Obligation: $9,971,626
Timeline
Start Date: 2002-11-06
Current End Date: 2009-12-14
Potential End Date: 2009-12-14 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2009-12-16
More Contracts from Aerojet Rocketdyne, Inc.
- Exploration Upper Stage Engines Msfc Will Procure TEN (10) RL10 Flight Engines From Aerojet Rocketdyne, Inc. to Support the Space Launch System (SLS) Exploration Missions 2 and 3 (EM-2 and EM-3). Each Flight Will Require a Four (4) Engine Cluster. Additionally, TWO (2) Spare Engines Will BE Procured. Corresponding to These Specific RL10 Engines, Nasa Msfc Will Procure Vehicle and Program Integration Support, Flight Support, and Human Rating Compliance Review Support — $285.1M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Nasa, Through the Space Technology Mission Directorate (stmd,) Seeks to Demonstrate an Advanced Solar Electric Propulsion (EP) System That Will Enable Future Deep Space Human and Robotic Exploration Applicable to the United States Private and Public Sector Space Needs. the Purpose of the Advanced Electric Propulsion (EP) System (aeps) Contract IS the Development and Delivery of EP String Sets to Support an Advanced SEP Demonstration Mission. During the Contract Base Period of Performance, the Contractor Will Develop, Test, and Deliver Engineering Development END Items That Will Reduce the Risk of Developing the Flight END Items. During the Option Period of Performance, IF Exercised, the Contractor Will Develop, Verify, and Deliver the Flight END Items — $230.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Technical Effort - Analysis and Design Engine Assembly (adea) - Hydrocarbon Boost to Provide High Operability and Flight Reliability AS Related to Reusable Liquid Rocket Engine (LRE) — $175.9M (Department of Defense)
- Stinger Flight Motors Increase — $53.6M (Department of Defense)
- Research and Development (R&D) - Stage 2 Large Class Tech Demo — $51.4M (Department of Defense)
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 →