NASA's $47.5M contract for sensor cooling packages awarded to Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $47,515,181 ($47.5M)
Contractor: Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2003-07-21
End Date: 2011-09-30
Contract Duration: 2,993 days
Daily Burn Rate: $15.9K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: SENSOR COOLING PACKAGE
Place of Performance
Location: WINDSOR LOCKS, HARTFORD County, CONNECTICUT, 06096
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $47.5 million to HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND CORPORATION for work described as: SENSOR COOLING PACKAGE Key points: 1. Value for money is difficult to assess due to the lack of competition and limited public data on performance metrics. 2. Competition dynamics show a sole-source award, raising questions about potential price overruns and limited market engagement. 3. Risk indicators include the sole-source nature of the award and the extended contract duration, which could mask inefficiencies. 4. Performance context is not readily available, making it challenging to benchmark against similar contracts or industry standards. 5. Sector positioning places this contract within engineering services for aerospace, a high-value, specialized market.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The total award of $47.5 million for sensor cooling packages over an eight-year period presents a significant expenditure. Without comparable contract data or detailed performance metrics, it is challenging to benchmark the value for money. The cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type suggests that costs were reimbursed, plus a fixed fee, which can sometimes lead to less incentive for cost control compared to fixed-price contracts. The lack of competition further complicates a robust value assessment.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning that NASA did not solicit bids from multiple potential contractors. This approach is typically used when only one source is capable of meeting the agency's needs, often due to proprietary technology or unique capabilities. The absence of competition means that price discovery through market forces was bypassed, potentially leading to higher costs for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can result in taxpayers paying a premium, as there is no competitive pressure to drive down prices. This limits the government's ability to secure the best possible value.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA's aerospace programs, which rely on advanced sensor cooling technology. The services delivered involve the development, manufacturing, and support of critical cooling systems for sensitive equipment. The geographic impact is primarily linked to NASA's research and development facilities and potentially the contractor's manufacturing sites. Workforce implications include specialized engineering and manufacturing jobs within the aerospace sector.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits price competition and potential for cost savings.
- Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type may reduce contractor incentive for cost efficiency.
- Extended contract duration (8 years) could obscure performance issues or cost overruns.
- Lack of publicly available performance metrics hinders independent value assessment.
Positive Signals
- Award to an established contractor (Hamilton Sundstrand) suggests potential for reliable delivery of specialized technology.
- Focus on critical sensor cooling indicates support for essential aerospace functions.
- Long-term contract may provide stability for a complex, long-lead-time technology.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the aerospace engineering services sector, a highly specialized and technologically advanced market. The market is characterized by high barriers to entry, significant R&D investment, and stringent performance requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the unique nature of aerospace components and the proprietary technologies involved. The total value of $47.5 million over eight years is substantial for a single component system, reflecting its critical function and complexity.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have involved small business set-asides, as indicated by the 'sb': false parameter. The sole-source nature of the award further suggests that opportunities for small business subcontracting were likely limited or not a primary consideration in the procurement strategy. Analysis of subcontracting plans would be necessary to determine any indirect impact on the small business ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically be managed by NASA's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures would be tied to the terms of the cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, including progress reports and milestone achievements. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source award and the proprietary nature of the technology involved. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Aerospace Component Procurement
- Advanced Cooling Systems
- Engineering Services Contracts
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Lack of competition
- Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type
- Limited performance data
Tags
nasa, hamilton-sundstrand-corporation, engineering-services, aerospace, sensor-cooling-package, definitive-contract, cost-plus-fixed-fee, sole-source, connecticut, national-aeronautics-and-space-administration
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $47.5 million to HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND CORPORATION. SENSOR COOLING PACKAGE
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND 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 $47.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2003-07-21. End: 2011-09-30.
What is the track record of Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation with NASA on similar contracts?
Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation, now part of Collins Aerospace, has a long history of providing complex systems and components to NASA and the defense industry. Their track record generally includes delivering sophisticated aerospace technologies. Specific performance data on past NASA contracts, especially those involving sensor cooling or similar critical systems, would require deeper investigation into NASA's contract databases and performance reports. However, their established presence suggests a capacity to handle demanding aerospace requirements. Without specific contract-level performance metrics for this particular award, a detailed assessment of their track record on this specific item remains limited to their general industry reputation and past dealings with government agencies.
How does the cost of this sensor cooling package compare to market rates or similar government procurements?
Benchmarking the cost of this $47.5 million contract for sensor cooling packages against market rates or similar government procurements is challenging due to several factors. Firstly, the contract was sole-sourced, bypassing competitive bidding which typically helps establish market-based pricing. Secondly, the specific technical requirements for 'sensor cooling packages' can vary significantly, making direct comparisons difficult without detailed specifications. Lastly, proprietary technology and specialized aerospace applications often command premium pricing. A cost-plus-fixed-fee structure also means costs were reimbursed plus a fee, rather than a fixed price, which can obscure true cost efficiency. Therefore, a definitive comparison to market rates or other government contracts is not feasible with the available public data.
What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for critical aerospace components?
The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for critical aerospace components like sensor cooling packages include a lack of price competition, which can lead to inflated costs for the government and taxpayers. There's also a reduced incentive for the sole provider to innovate or improve efficiency, as there are no competitors to outperform. Furthermore, reliance on a single supplier can create supply chain vulnerabilities; if the contractor experiences production issues, delays, or financial instability, NASA's programs could be significantly impacted. Finally, without competitive proposals, it's harder to ensure that the chosen solution represents the best available technology or the most cost-effective approach.
How effective are cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts in ensuring value for money in complex R&D scenarios?
Cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contracts are often used in research and development (R&D) or complex projects where the scope of work is not fully defined at the outset, making fixed-price contracts impractical. In such scenarios, CPFF can be effective in allowing flexibility and innovation by reimbursing the contractor for allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee. This structure incentivizes the contractor to control costs to protect their fee, but the primary incentive for cost control is less direct than in fixed-price contracts. The effectiveness in ensuring value for money heavily depends on robust government oversight, clear performance metrics, and well-defined milestones to manage the project scope and prevent cost overruns beyond the anticipated effort. Without strong oversight, CPFF contracts can lead to higher costs than anticipated.
What is the historical spending trend for sensor cooling packages or similar aerospace components by NASA?
Analyzing historical spending trends for 'sensor cooling packages' specifically by NASA is challenging without more granular data. This is because such components are often part of larger system procurements or R&D efforts, and spending might be aggregated under broader categories like 'Engineering Services,' 'Aerospace Systems,' or specific program budgets. The $47.5 million awarded to Hamilton Sundstrand over an eight-year period (2003-2011) represents a significant, albeit specific, investment. To understand broader trends, one would need to examine NASA's budget allocations for related technologies over multiple fiscal years, looking at trends in R&D spending, major system acquisitions, and the procurement of specialized components for spacecraft and scientific instruments. The sole-source nature of this particular award also suggests that historical spending on this specific item might not reflect competitive market dynamics.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › C – National Defense R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Contractor Details
Parent Company: RTX Corp (UEI: 001344142)
Address: ONE HAMILTON ROAD, WINDSOR LOCKS, CT, 06096
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $48,366,575
Exercised Options: $48,366,575
Current Obligation: $47,515,181
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Timeline
Start Date: 2003-07-21
Current End Date: 2011-09-30
Potential End Date: 2011-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2016-08-26
More Contracts from Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation
- Define & Integrate EVA Requirements for Shuttle & ISS Expeditions/Sustaining Engineering EVA — $511.3M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Generator,Direct CU — $68.3M (Department of Defense)
- Modern Pump Housing Hardware KIT — $46.3M (Department of Defense)
- Generator,Direct CU — $29.2M (Department of Defense)
- Cbms II Systems — $29.2M (Department of Defense)
View all Hamilton Sundstrand 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 →