DoD's $225M supersonic target development contract awarded to Alliant Techsystems Operations LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $225,436,947 ($225.4M)

Contractor: Alliant Techsystems Operations LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-08-22

End Date: 2015-11-30

Contract Duration: 2,656 days

Daily Burn Rate: $84.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: DESIGN, DEVELOP, INTEGRATE, TEST A MULTI-STAGE SUPERSONIC TARGET (MSST)

Place of Performance

Location: NORTHRIDGE, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 91324

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $225.4 million to ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS OPERATIONS LLC for work described as: DESIGN, DEVELOP, INTEGRATE, TEST A MULTI-STAGE SUPERSONIC TARGET (MSST) Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a robust market. 2. Cost-plus incentive fee structure may incentivize contractor efficiency. 3. Long duration (2656 days) indicates a complex, multi-year development effort. 4. Awarded in 2008, performance concluded in 2015, providing historical data for analysis. 5. Focus on guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing aligns with defense sector needs. 6. No small business set-aside indicates the primary contractor is likely a large entity.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $225.4 million for the development and integration of a multi-stage supersonic target is substantial. Benchmarking this against similar complex defense development contracts is challenging without more specific performance metrics and comparable systems. The cost-plus incentive fee (CPIF) contract type suggests that while costs are reimbursed, there are incentives for the contractor to stay within or below target costs, which can be a value driver if managed effectively. However, CPIF contracts can also lead to cost overruns if not closely monitored.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit offers. This typically leads to a more competitive bidding process, potentially resulting in better pricing and terms for the government. The presence of 3 offers (no=3) suggests a reasonable level of competition for this specialized defense development requirement.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down costs and encourage innovation, leading to better value for public funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense, specifically units requiring advanced missile and target systems for training and testing. The contract delivered the design, development, integration, and testing of a Multi-Stage Supersonic Target (MSST). The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, likely involving research, development, and testing facilities. Workforce implications include highly skilled engineers, technicians, and program managers in the aerospace and defense industry.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost-plus incentive fee contracts carry inherent risks of cost growth if not rigorously managed and overseen.
The long contract duration increases the potential for scope creep or evolving requirements that may impact final costs.
The specialized nature of supersonic target development may limit the pool of experienced contractors, potentially affecting future competition.
Performance data and final cost outcomes are not detailed, making a definitive value assessment difficult.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive process that should have yielded fair market value.
The incentive fee structure, if properly structured and monitored, can align contractor and government interests towards cost efficiency.
The contractor, Alliant Techsystems Operations LLC, is a known entity in the defense sector, suggesting a degree of established capability.
The contract successfully delivered a complex technological system (MSST) as per its objectives.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on advanced target systems crucial for missile defense testing and training. The market for such specialized defense components is characterized by high technological barriers to entry and significant government investment. Comparable spending benchmarks would likely involve other complex weapon system development programs or advanced simulation and training systems within the DoD.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside (sb=false), and there is no explicit mention of subcontracting goals for small businesses. This suggests that the primary contract was awarded to a large business, and while subcontracting opportunities may exist, they were not a primary driver of the contract's structure. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether Alliant Techsystems actively sought small business partners for specialized components or services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), responsible for ensuring contractor performance and compliance. The cost-plus incentive fee structure necessitates close monitoring of costs, progress, and adherence to technical specifications. Transparency is typically managed through contract reporting requirements and program reviews. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Missile Defense Systems
Advanced Target and Decoy Systems
Aerospace Research and Development
Guided Missile Manufacturing
Department of Defense Procurement

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may indicate complexity or potential for delays.
Cost-plus contracts require diligent oversight to manage potential cost overruns.
Specialized nature of the technology may limit future competition.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $225.4 million to ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS OPERATIONS LLC. DESIGN, DEVELOP, INTEGRATE, TEST A MULTI-STAGE SUPERSONIC TARGET (MSST)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS OPERATIONS 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 $225.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-08-22. End: 2015-11-30.

What was the contractor's track record with similar complex defense development contracts prior to this award?

Alliant Techsystems (now part of Northrop Grumman) has a long history of developing and producing complex defense systems, including missiles, aerospace components, and advanced electronics. Prior to this 2008 award, the company had established itself as a significant defense contractor through numerous other contracts. While specific performance metrics on prior, directly comparable supersonic target development programs are not detailed here, their general experience in areas like propulsion, guidance, and integration for advanced aerospace applications would have been a key factor in their selection. The company's broader portfolio suggests a capacity for managing large, technically challenging development efforts, though the success of any specific program hinges on detailed execution and oversight.

How does the final cost compare to the initial estimated cost or target cost for this contract?

The provided data indicates the total award amount was $225,436,946.60. However, it does not specify the initial estimated cost or target cost established at the time of award, nor does it provide the final incurred cost. As this was a Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract, the final cost would be influenced by the contractor's ability to meet performance targets and manage costs within the incentive framework. Without knowing the baseline target costs and the achieved performance metrics, it's impossible to definitively state whether the contract was cost-efficient or if it exceeded expectations. Further analysis would require access to the contract's financial performance reports.

What were the key performance metrics used to evaluate the success of the MSST development?

The key performance metrics for the Multi-Stage Supersonic Target (MSST) development would have been tied to its ability to accurately simulate supersonic threats for defense system testing. This likely included parameters such as achieving and maintaining specific supersonic speeds, trajectory accuracy, maneuverability capabilities, survivability during testing, and the fidelity of its radar cross-section and infrared signature to mimic actual threats. Integration success, reliability of components, and successful completion of all development, integration, and testing phases within the contract's technical scope would also be critical. Specific quantitative targets for these metrics would have been defined in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and performance specifications.

Were there any significant technical challenges or delays encountered during the contract period?

The contract duration of 2656 days (approximately 7.3 years) from award (August 2008) to completion (November 2015) suggests a complex development process that likely encountered technical challenges. Developing a multi-stage supersonic target involves advanced aerodynamics, propulsion systems, materials science, and control systems, all operating under extreme conditions. While the provided data doesn't detail specific challenges or delays, such long development cycles in cutting-edge defense technology often involve iterative design, testing, and refinement to overcome unforeseen technical hurdles. The CPIF contract structure might have provided flexibility to address some of these challenges, but significant issues could still impact timelines and costs.

How does this spending compare to other DoD contracts for similar target or simulation systems?

Comparing this $225 million contract for MSST development to other DoD contracts requires identifying truly comparable systems. If the MSST is a unique, high-fidelity supersonic threat simulator, its cost might be higher than simpler drone targets but potentially lower than full-scale integrated training simulations. The DoD spends billions annually on training and simulation systems, ranging from individual simulators to large-scale virtual environments. Contracts for advanced aerial targets, especially those capable of supersonic speeds and complex flight profiles, are specialized. Without specific comparable system data, it's difficult to benchmark precisely, but $225 million for the R&D and initial production of such a sophisticated target system appears within the expected range for advanced defense acquisition programs.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT AND STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: N0001907R0089

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Northrop Grumman Corporation (UEI: 967356127)

Address: 21301 BURBANK BLVD, WOODLAND HILLS, CA, 91367

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $225,436,947

Exercised Options: $225,436,947

Current Obligation: $225,436,947

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline