DoD's $122M TAF Aircraft Upgrade Contract Awarded to Northrop Grumman for Manufacturing
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $122,000,936 ($122.0M)
Contractor: Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2009-07-21
End Date: 2016-05-31
Contract Duration: 2,506 days
Daily Burn Rate: $48.7K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: UPGRADE OF TAF AIRCRAFT
Place of Performance
Location: MELBOURNE, BREVARD County, FLORIDA, 32904
State: Florida Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $122.0 million to NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION for work described as: UPGRADE OF TAF AIRCRAFT Key points: 1. Contract awarded for aircraft manufacturing services, indicating a need for specialized capabilities. 2. The firm-fixed-price contract type suggests a defined scope and cost structure. 3. A long duration of 2506 days points to a complex and extended project lifecycle. 4. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, implying a broad search for qualified bidders. 5. Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, a major defense contractor, secured this award. 6. The contract falls under the Aircraft Manufacturing NAICS code, aligning with industry specialization.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The total contract value of $122,000,936 for aircraft manufacturing over approximately seven years suggests a significant investment. Without specific details on the scope of the 'TAF Aircraft Upgrade,' direct comparison to similar contracts is challenging. However, the firm-fixed-price nature implies that the contractor assumed the risk for cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator of value if the work is completed as specified. Benchmarking the per-unit cost or cost per upgrade would require more granular data on the specific aircraft and the nature of the upgrade.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that the Department of Defense sought proposals from all responsible sources. The number of bidders is not specified, but this method generally promotes a competitive environment, allowing for price discovery and potentially leading to more favorable terms for the government. The broad competition suggests that multiple companies likely had the capability to perform this aircraft manufacturing upgrade.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically benefits taxpayers by fostering a market where prices are driven down through bidding, ensuring the government receives competitive pricing for its procurements.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of Defense, which will receive upgraded TAF aircraft, enhancing its operational capabilities. The services delivered involve the manufacturing and upgrade of aircraft, crucial for military readiness. The contract's performance is based in Florida (FL), suggesting a geographic concentration of economic activity and potential workforce impact in that state. The workforce implications include employment opportunities for skilled labor in aircraft manufacturing and related technical fields within Northrop Grumman and its potential subcontractors.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Long contract duration (2506 days) can sometimes lead to scope creep or evolving requirements, potentially impacting final costs if not managed tightly.
- Reliance on a single large contractor (Northrop Grumman) for a significant upgrade could limit future flexibility or competition for sustainment.
- Lack of specific details on the 'TAF Aircraft Upgrade' makes it difficult to assess the true value and necessity of the work performed.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process and potential for competitive pricing.
- Firm Fixed Price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor, which can be advantageous for the government.
- Northrop Grumman is a well-established defense contractor with significant experience in aircraft manufacturing, implying a higher likelihood of successful execution.
Sector Analysis
The aerospace and defense sector is characterized by high barriers to entry, significant R&D investment, and long product development cycles. This contract for aircraft manufacturing and upgrades fits squarely within this sector, specifically the aircraft manufacturing sub-industry (NAICS 336411). The total award of $122 million over several years represents a substantial investment in maintaining and enhancing military aviation assets. Comparable spending benchmarks in this area are often in the hundreds of millions or billions for major platform development or modernization programs.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb: false'. Furthermore, the prime contractor, Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, is a large aerospace and defense company. While large prime contractors are often required to subcontract a portion of their work to small businesses, the specific subcontracting plan and its impact on the small business ecosystem are not detailed in the provided data. Without this information, it's difficult to assess the direct benefits or implications for small businesses in this particular contract.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Defense's contracting and program management structures, likely involving the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) given the 'sa' field. Accountability measures are typically embedded in the contract terms, including performance metrics, delivery schedules, and quality standards, with penalties for non-compliance. Transparency is often managed through contract reporting requirements and public contract databases, though detailed operational transparency can be limited due to national security considerations. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to investigations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.
Related Government Programs
- Aircraft Modernization Programs
- Defense Aviation Procurement
- Military Aircraft Manufacturing
- Northrop Grumman Defense Contracts
- TAF Aircraft Fleet Support
Risk Flags
- Potential for schedule delays due to complexity of aircraft upgrades.
- Technical challenges in integrating new systems with legacy aircraft.
- Cost overruns are mitigated by FFP, but scope creep remains a risk.
- Long contract duration requires sustained oversight.
Tags
defense, department-of-defense, northrop-grumman-systems-corporation, aircraft-manufacturing, definitive-contract, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, florida, large-contract, long-duration, avionics-upgrade, tactical-airlift
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $122.0 million to NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION. UPGRADE OF TAF AIRCRAFT
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORPORATION.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $122.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-07-21. End: 2016-05-31.
What specific upgrades were performed on the TAF aircraft under this contract?
The provided data does not specify the exact nature of the 'UPGRADE OF TAF AIRCRAFT.' TAF typically refers to Tactical Airlift Force. Upgrades could encompass a wide range of improvements, such as avionics modernization, structural enhancements, engine replacements, or integration of new mission systems. Without further details from contract line item numbers (CLINs) or technical exhibits, the precise scope of work remains undefined. This lack of specificity makes it challenging to fully assess the value and impact of the $122 million investment.
How does the $122 million contract value compare to typical aircraft upgrade programs of similar scope?
Benchmarking the $122 million contract value requires understanding the specific 'TAF Aircraft Upgrade.' If TAF refers to a fleet of tactical airlift aircraft, and the upgrade involves significant avionics, structural, or systems overhauls, this figure could be within a reasonable range for a multi-year program. However, without knowing the number of aircraft upgraded, the complexity of the modifications, and the specific systems involved, a direct comparison is difficult. For instance, a simple avionics refresh might cost significantly less per aircraft than a complete structural refurbishment and integration of advanced mission equipment. The long duration (2506 days) suggests a substantial undertaking, potentially involving multiple aircraft or complex modifications.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this contract?
The provided summary data does not explicitly list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. However, for a firm-fixed-price contract involving aircraft manufacturing and upgrades, typical KPIs would likely include adherence to the delivery schedule, meeting technical specifications and performance requirements, quality control standards (e.g., defect rates, rework), and potentially cost control within the fixed price. The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) would likely oversee performance monitoring, ensuring Northrop Grumman meets the contractual obligations related to aircraft airworthiness, functionality, and upgrade completion.
What is Northrop Grumman's track record with similar Department of Defense aircraft upgrade contracts?
Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation is a major defense contractor with extensive experience in aerospace and defense, including aircraft manufacturing, sustainment, and modernization. They have a long history of working with the Department of Defense on various aircraft programs, including large, complex upgrades and new platform development. While specific details on their past performance for 'TAF Aircraft Upgrades' are not provided here, their established presence and capabilities in the sector suggest a significant track record. Performance reviews and past performance data, typically available in government databases, would offer a more granular assessment of their success on similar contracts.
What is the historical spending trend for TAF aircraft upgrades or similar programs within the Department of Defense?
The provided data focuses on a single contract award and does not offer historical spending trends. To assess this, one would need to analyze multi-year spending data for TAF aircraft sustainment, modernization, or upgrade programs within the Department of Defense. This would involve querying federal procurement databases for similar contract actions over several fiscal years. Factors influencing historical spending include fleet size, aging aircraft issues, evolving mission requirements, and budget allocations for aviation modernization. Without this broader context, it's difficult to determine if the $122 million award represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of investment.
Are there any identified risks associated with this contract, such as technical challenges or contractor performance issues?
The provided data does not explicitly list identified risks for this contract. However, general risks associated with large-scale aircraft upgrade programs include technical complexity, potential for unforeseen issues during modification, integration challenges with existing systems, and schedule delays. Contractor performance risks are always present, though Northrop Grumman's established reputation may mitigate some concerns. The firm-fixed-price nature shifts cost risk to the contractor, but schedule and performance risks remain. A thorough risk assessment would typically be conducted by the procuring agency and documented within the contract file.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Aircraft Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT COMPONENTS AND ACCESSORIES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Northrop Grumman Corporation
Address: 2000 W NASA BLVD, MELBOURNE, FL, 32904
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $122,000,936
Exercised Options: $122,000,936
Current Obligation: $122,000,936
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-07-21
Current End Date: 2016-05-31
Potential End Date: 2016-05-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2023-06-14
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 Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)