DoD awards $47.1M for guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing to Orbital Sciences LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $47,140,316 ($47.1M)

Contractor: Orbital Sciences LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2012-08-07

End Date: 2017-12-31

Contract Duration: 1,972 days

Daily Burn Rate: $23.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: LTPO FT7-5 TASK ORDER

Place of Performance

Location: CHANDLER, MARICOPA County, ARIZONA, 85286

State: Arizona Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $47.1 million to ORBITAL SCIENCES LLC for work described as: LTPO FT7-5 TASK ORDER Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF), which can incentivize cost control. 3. Performance period spans over 5 years, indicating a long-term need for these services. 4. The contractor, Orbital Sciences LLC, is a significant player in the aerospace and defense sector. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 336414 points to specialized manufacturing capabilities. 6. The contract was awarded as a delivery order under a larger contract vehicle.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific task order is challenging without knowing the scope of the underlying contract. However, the CPIF contract type suggests a negotiated pricing structure where the government shares in cost savings. The total award amount of $47.1 million over nearly 2000 days indicates a substantial investment in guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing capabilities. Further analysis would require comparing the unit costs and performance metrics against similar government contracts for comparable systems.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this procurement method generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and innovation. The government likely sought the best value proposition from a range of qualified contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of obtaining competitive pricing and ensures that the government is not limited to a single provider, potentially driving down costs.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely components of the Department of Defense requiring advanced guided missile and space vehicle systems. The services delivered involve the manufacturing of complex aerospace components. The contract is associated with the state of Arizona, indicating potential workforce and economic impact in that region. This contract supports specialized manufacturing jobs within the aerospace and defense industry.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific details on the number of bidders limits the assessment of competitive intensity.
The CPIF contract type requires careful monitoring to ensure cost efficiencies are realized.
The long performance period necessitates ongoing oversight to ensure continued value and performance.
The specific nature of 'guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing' implies high-risk, high-complexity work.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a broad search for qualified contractors.
The contractor, Orbital Sciences LLC, has a significant presence and experience in the aerospace sector.
The CPIF structure can align contractor incentives with government cost objectives.
The contract supports critical defense manufacturing capabilities.

Sector Analysis

The guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing sector is a highly specialized and technologically advanced segment of the aerospace and defense industry. This contract falls within the broader defense manufacturing market, which is characterized by high barriers to entry due to stringent quality requirements, advanced R&D, and significant capital investment. Spending in this area is driven by national security needs and technological advancements in defense systems. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within the DoD's procurement data for similar weapon systems and space-based assets.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary contractor, Orbital Sciences LLC, is likely a large business. While there is no direct information on subcontracting plans, large defense contracts often include provisions for small business participation. The absence of a small business set-aside suggests that the competition was open to all responsible sources, and small businesses may have participated as subcontractors rather than prime contractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which is responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. The CPIF contract type necessitates close monitoring of costs and performance against established targets. Transparency is generally maintained through contract reporting mechanisms and potential audits by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or the Inspector General's office, depending on the contract's value and complexity.

Related Government Programs

Missile Manufacturing
Space Vehicle Production
Aerospace Defense Contracts
Cost Plus Incentive Fee Contracts
Department of Defense Procurement

Risk Flags

Long performance period requires sustained oversight.
CPIF contract type necessitates careful cost monitoring.
Complexity of 'guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing' implies inherent risks.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $47.1 million to ORBITAL SCIENCES LLC. LTPO FT7-5 TASK ORDER

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ORBITAL SCIENCES 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 $47.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2012-08-07. End: 2017-12-31.

What is the track record of Orbital Sciences LLC with the Department of Defense for similar contracts?

Orbital Sciences LLC, now part of Northrop Grumman, has a long history of working with the Department of Defense on various aerospace and defense programs. Their experience spans satellite development, launch services, and missile systems. Historically, they have been awarded numerous contracts for research, development, production, and sustainment of defense-related technologies. While specific performance metrics for past contracts are not detailed here, their sustained presence in the defense sector suggests a generally positive track record. However, like any large contractor, there may have been instances of performance issues or contract disputes that would require deeper investigation into specific contract histories and performance reviews.

How does the $47.1 million award compare to typical spending for guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing?

The $47.1 million award for guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing represents a significant but not extraordinary investment for a task order of this nature. The defense sector, particularly in advanced manufacturing for missiles and space vehicles, involves high-value, complex systems. Annual spending on such programs can range from billions to tens of billions of dollars across the entire DoD. This specific award, spanning nearly five years, suggests a substantial project, likely for a specific system or component. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to benchmark against the average cost of similar missile systems or space vehicle components procured by the DoD over comparable timeframes, considering factors like technological sophistication and quantity.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract for this type of manufacturing?

The primary risks associated with a CPIF contract for guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing revolve around cost control and contractor incentives. While CPIF aims to incentivize cost savings by sharing savings with the contractor, there's a risk that the target cost might be set too high, leading to excessive profits for the contractor even with savings. Conversely, if the target cost is too low, it could strain the contractor's ability to deliver quality products or lead to disputes. For complex, high-technology manufacturing like missiles and space vehicles, estimating costs accurately is inherently difficult, increasing the risk of cost overruns. Effective oversight is crucial to ensure the incentive structure truly drives efficiency without compromising quality or schedule.

What does the 'Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing' NAICS code (336414) imply about the services being procured?

The NAICS code 336414, 'Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing,' indicates that the contract is for the production of components or complete systems related to guided missiles and space vehicles. This includes the manufacturing of airframes, propulsion systems, guidance systems, warheads (if applicable), and related sub-assemblies. It signifies a procurement of tangible manufactured goods rather than services like research, development, or maintenance, although R&D might be a component of the manufacturing process. Companies operating under this NAICS code possess specialized facilities, advanced manufacturing techniques, and rigorous quality control processes necessary for producing high-reliability aerospace and defense hardware.

How does the contract's performance period (2012-2017) reflect historical spending patterns in defense manufacturing?

The performance period of August 7, 2012, to December 31, 2017, falls within a period of significant defense spending, influenced by ongoing military operations and modernization efforts. Defense manufacturing contracts, especially for complex systems like missiles and space vehicles, often have multi-year performance periods due to the lengthy development, testing, and production cycles involved. This timeframe reflects a sustained commitment by the DoD to acquire and maintain advanced capabilities. Historical spending patterns during this era show a consistent demand for sophisticated defense hardware, driven by geopolitical factors and strategic priorities. The duration of this contract is typical for large-scale manufacturing efforts in the defense sector.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › C – National Defense R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Northrop Grumman Corporation

Address: 1575 SOUTH PRICE RD, CHANDLER, AZ, 85286

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $51,784,758

Exercised Options: $51,784,758

Current Obligation: $47,140,316

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 36

Total Subaward Amount: $7,234,312

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA881808D0036

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline