DoD Awards $29.2M Missile Systems Contract to Sierra Nevada Corp for R&D

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $29,225,907 ($29.2M)

Contractor: Sierra Nevada Company, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-05-12

End Date: 2011-12-31

Contract Duration: 2,059 days

Daily Burn Rate: $14.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: R&D

Official Description: 200608!003344!2100!W31P4Q!USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!W31P4Q06C0333 !A!N! !N! ! !20060512!20110131!094373495!094373495!094373495!N!SIERRA NEVADA CORPORATION !444 SALOMON CIR !SPARKS !NV!89434!68400!031!32!SPARKS !WASHOE !NEVADA !+000005324863!N!N!000000000000!AB95!RDTE/OTHER COMMUNITY SVCS&DEVELOP-ENG/MANUF DEV !A2 !MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !336413!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!N!J!2!005!K! !Z!Y!A! ! !N!B!Y!N! ! !C! !B!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: SPARKS, WASHOE County, NEVADA, 89434

State: Nevada Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $29.2 million to SIERRA NEVADA COMPANY, LLC for work described as: 200608!003344!2100!W31P4Q!USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!W31P4Q06C0333 !A!N! !N! ! !20060512!20110131!094373495!094373495!094373495!N!SIERRA NEVADA CORPORATION !444 SALOMON CIR !SPARKS !NV!89434!68400!031!32!SPARKS !WASH… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for Missile and Space Systems R&D. 2. Sierra Nevada Corporation is the prime contractor. 3. Competition was full and open, suggesting potential for competitive pricing. 4. The sector is Defense R&D, a critical area for national security.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $29.2M over approximately 5.6 years results in an average annual value of $5.2M. Benchmarking this against similar R&D contracts for missile systems is difficult without more specific cost breakdowns.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, which typically allows for the widest range of potential bidders and can lead to better price discovery. However, the specific pricing structure (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed tightly.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition is generally positive for taxpayers, as it aims to secure the best value. However, the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure requires careful oversight to ensure costs remain reasonable.

Public Impact

Supports critical missile and space systems development for the Department of Defense. Potential for technological advancements in defense capabilities. Contract duration of over 5 years allows for sustained R&D efforts.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type can incentivize higher costs.
Long contract duration may require ongoing monitoring for scope creep.
Lack of specific performance metrics in provided data.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition promotes a competitive environment.
Contract supports a key national security sector (Missile and Space Systems).
Prime contractor has experience in aerospace and defense.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDTE) category for Missile and Space Systems. Spending in this sector is crucial for maintaining technological superiority but can be subject to significant cost fluctuations due to the inherent uncertainties of R&D.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any subcontracting goals or awards to small businesses for this contract. Further investigation would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract was awarded by the Department of Defense, which has established oversight mechanisms. However, the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure necessitates diligent oversight by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) to ensure cost control and adherence to contract terms.

Related Government Programs

Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing
Department of Defense Contracting
Defense Contract Management Agency Programs

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type.
Long contract duration.
Limited public information on specific performance metrics.
Potential for cost overruns without stringent oversight.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $29.2 million to SIERRA NEVADA COMPANY, LLC. 200608!003344!2100!W31P4Q!USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!W31P4Q06C0333 !A!N! !N! ! !20060512!20110131!094373495!094373495!094373495!N!SIERRA NEVADA CORPORATION !444 SALOMON CIR !SPARKS !NV!89434!68400!031!32!SPARKS !WASHOE !NEVADA !+000005324863!N!N!000000000000!AB95!RDTE/OTHER COMMUNITY SVCS&DEVELOP-ENG/MANUF DEV !A2 !MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !336413!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SIERRA NEVADA COMPANY, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $29.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-05-12. End: 2011-12-31.

What specific research and development milestones are outlined in the contract, and how will their achievement be measured to ensure value for money?

The contract details for specific R&D milestones and their measurement criteria are not publicly available in this data extract. Effective oversight would require the contracting officer and DCMA to closely monitor progress against defined technical and programmatic milestones. Without this information, assessing the true value for money is challenging, as it relies heavily on the contractor's internal reporting and the agency's ability to verify results.

Given the Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure, what are the primary risks of cost overruns, and what mitigation strategies are in place?

The primary risk with Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts is that the contractor may have less incentive to control costs compared to fixed-price contracts, as costs are reimbursed. The fixed fee provides a profit incentive, but if costs escalate significantly, the fee as a percentage of total cost decreases. Mitigation strategies typically include robust government oversight, detailed cost tracking, regular audits, and clear definition of allowable costs.

How does the technological innovation resulting from this contract contribute to the overall effectiveness of US missile and space systems?

The effectiveness of the technological innovation from this contract hinges on the specific advancements made in missile and space systems. As a contract focused on R&D, its primary goal is to push the boundaries of existing technology. The ultimate effectiveness will be determined by how well these innovations translate into improved system performance, reliability, and capability in future defense applications, which requires ongoing evaluation post-development.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Community and Regional Development R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 444 SALOMON CIR, SPARKS, NV, 89434

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Woman Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline