NASA awards $10.65M contract for spin form dome hardware, highlighting engineering services for a demonstration article
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $10,650,148 ($10.7M)
Contractor: Teledyne Brown Engineering, Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2007-09-26
End Date: 2010-10-27
Contract Duration: 1,127 days
Daily Burn Rate: $9.4K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: TO ACQUIRE SPIN FORM DOME HARDWARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMMON BULKHEAD DEMONSTRATION ARTICLE.
Place of Performance
Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35812
State: Alabama Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $10.7 million to TELEDYNE BROWN ENGINEERING, INC. for work described as: TO ACQUIRE SPIN FORM DOME HARDWARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMMON BULKHEAD DEMONSTRATION ARTICLE. Key points: 1. Contract focuses on specialized engineering services for a specific demonstration article. 2. The award was made on a non-competitive basis, raising questions about potential cost efficiencies. 3. The contract duration of over three years suggests a significant scope of work. 4. The fixed-price nature of the contract aims to control costs for the government. 5. The geographic location of the contractor in Alabama may indicate regional specialization in aerospace engineering. 6. The absence of small business involvement warrants further investigation into subcontracting opportunities.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract value of $10.65 million for engineering services related to a demonstration article appears to be within a reasonable range for specialized aerospace components. However, without direct comparisons to similar dome hardware development or specific engineering tasks for demonstration articles, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty, but the lack of competition means there was no market pressure to drive down the price.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one vendor was solicited. This approach bypasses the typical competitive bidding process, which can lead to higher prices and reduced innovation. The justification for a sole-source award would typically involve unique capabilities or a critical need that only one contractor can fulfill. The lack of competition limits the government's ability to explore alternative solutions or secure the best possible pricing.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding. Without multiple offers, there is less assurance that the price reflects the full market value for the services rendered.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which receives specialized hardware for its common bulkhead demonstration article. The contract supports the development and acquisition of critical components for a specific aerospace demonstration project. The geographic impact is concentrated in Alabama, where the contractor, Teledyne Brown Engineering, Inc., is located. The contract likely supports a specialized engineering workforce within the contractor's organization.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits price discovery and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
- Lack of competition may stifle innovation and prevent exploration of alternative technical solutions.
- No explicit small business set-aside or subcontracting plan mentioned, potentially excluding smaller firms from participation.
Positive Signals
- Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
- Contract duration of over three years suggests a substantial and potentially complex project.
- Award to a specific contractor implies they possess unique or critical capabilities for this requirement.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the engineering services sector, specifically supporting aerospace research and development. The market for specialized aerospace components and engineering services is often characterized by high barriers to entry, requiring significant technical expertise and specialized facilities. Spending in this area is driven by government investment in space exploration, defense, and scientific research. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other NASA contracts for similar hardware development or specialized engineering support.
Small Business Impact
The contract details do not indicate any small business set-aside provisions. Furthermore, the sole-source nature of the award suggests that subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may be limited, depending on the prime contractor's internal policies and the specific nature of the work. A thorough review of the prime contractor's subcontracting plan, if one exists, would be necessary to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with NASA's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are embedded within the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified hardware. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award, with less public information available compared to competitively procured contracts. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Common Bulkhead Program
- Aerospace Hardware Development Contracts
- Engineering Services for Space Exploration
- Demonstration Article Procurement
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Lack of competition
- Potential for higher costs
- Limited transparency
Tags
engineering-services, nasa, alabama, firm-fixed-price, large-contract, sole-source, r&d, aerospace, demonstration-article, teledyne-brown-engineering
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $10.7 million to TELEDYNE BROWN ENGINEERING, INC.. TO ACQUIRE SPIN FORM DOME HARDWARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMMON BULKHEAD DEMONSTRATION ARTICLE.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is TELEDYNE BROWN ENGINEERING, INC..
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 $10.7 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2007-09-26. End: 2010-10-27.
What is the specific technical function of the 'spin form dome hardware' and its importance to the 'common bulkhead demonstration article'?
The 'spin form dome hardware' likely refers to specialized components designed to form a dome shape through a spin-forming manufacturing process. This process is often used for creating precise, high-strength, and seamless metal structures. In the context of a 'common bulkhead demonstration article,' these dome components could be critical for creating the structural integrity, pressure containment, or specific aerodynamic/hydrodynamic properties required for testing a standardized bulkhead design. The importance lies in enabling the demonstration article to accurately simulate real-world conditions or validate design principles for future spacecraft, launch vehicles, or other aerospace systems where common bulkheads are utilized.
Can Teledyne Brown Engineering, Inc. provide specific examples of their past performance on similar sole-source contracts for specialized aerospace hardware?
Teledyne Brown Engineering, Inc. has a long history of supporting NASA and other government agencies with complex engineering and manufacturing solutions. While specific details on past sole-source contracts for 'spin form dome hardware' may be proprietary or not publicly disclosed, the company has extensive experience in areas such as spacecraft structures, propulsion systems, and advanced manufacturing techniques, including metal forming. Their track record includes work on programs like the Space Shuttle, International Space Station, and various satellite systems. To ascertain specific past performance relevant to this sole-source award, one would typically review NASA's internal contract performance evaluations or request detailed project histories from the contractor, subject to confidentiality agreements.
What was the justification provided by NASA for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis instead of through full and open competition?
The justification for a sole-source award typically falls under specific exceptions to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). For this contract, NASA would have likely cited reasons such as the unique capabilities of Teledyne Brown Engineering, Inc., the urgent need for the specific hardware where only this contractor could meet the timeline, or that the nature of the requirement is such that only one responsible source is capable of providing the supplies or services. Without access to NASA's official sole-source justification document (e.g., a Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition - JOFOC), the precise rationale remains speculative. However, such justifications are rigorously reviewed to ensure they meet FAR criteria.
How does the $10.65 million contract value compare to other NASA procurements for engineering services or specialized hardware development in recent years?
Benchmarking the $10.65 million contract value requires comparing it to similar procurements within NASA for specialized engineering services and hardware development. Contracts for unique aerospace components, especially those involving advanced manufacturing processes like spin forming for demonstration articles, can vary significantly in price based on complexity, materials, quantity, and development scope. While $10.65 million is a substantial sum, it may be considered moderate within the context of large-scale aerospace projects. For instance, contracts for major spacecraft subsystems or launch vehicle components can range from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to analyze NASA's contract database for awards with similar NAICS codes (e.g., 541330 - Engineering Services) and contract types over a relevant period.
What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source contract of this magnitude and duration, particularly concerning cost overruns or performance issues?
Sole-source contracts inherently carry risks related to cost and performance due to the lack of competitive pressure. For a $10.65 million contract spanning over three years, potential risks include: 1. Cost Overruns: Without competitive bids, the contractor may have less incentive to control costs, potentially leading to prices higher than what could be achieved through competition. NASA's oversight is crucial to monitor expenditures. 2. Performance Issues: While the firm fixed-price structure incentivizes completion, a sole-source provider might face less pressure to innovate or resolve performance issues promptly if alternative suppliers are not readily available. 3. Scope Creep: Changes in requirements during the contract's long duration could lead to cost increases if not managed strictly. 4. Contractor Dependency: NASA becomes reliant on a single supplier, which can be a strategic risk if the contractor faces financial difficulties or operational disruptions.
What is the historical spending pattern for 'Engineering Services' (NAICS 541330) by NASA, and how does this specific contract fit within that trend?
NASA consistently procures significant amounts of engineering services, categorized under NAICS code 541330, to support its diverse missions in space exploration, aeronautics research, and technology development. Historical spending data would reveal a substantial and ongoing investment in this sector. This specific $10.65 million contract for spin form dome hardware fits within NASA's broader pattern of acquiring specialized engineering expertise and custom-fabricated components necessary for research, development, and demonstration projects. While the total annual spending on engineering services by NASA can fluctuate based on program cycles and budget allocations, contracts like this represent a crucial element of enabling technological advancements and validating new concepts before full-scale implementation.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Space R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Teledyne Technologies Incorporated (UEI: 112358432)
Address: 300 SPARKMAN DRIVE, HUNTSVILLE, AL, 35805
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $10,664,313
Exercised Options: $10,664,313
Current Obligation: $10,650,148
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: NNM06AA10Z
IDV Type: BPA
Timeline
Start Date: 2007-09-26
Current End Date: 2010-10-27
Potential End Date: 2010-10-27 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2020-03-12
More Contracts from Teledyne Brown Engineering, Inc.
- Systems Development&operations Support a Primary Mission of the Marshall Space Flight Center (msfc) IS to Support Nasa's Human Exploration and Development of Space (heds) Enterprise and the Office of Biological and Physical Research (obpr) Enterprise WHO ARE Working Together to Facilitate Long-Term Exploration of Space. Msfc Serves AS Nasa's Lead Center for the Materials Science and Biotechnology Disciplines and Serves Other Customers and Sponsors Within the Agency. the Purposes of This Contract ARE to Further the Science Goals of the Agency by 1) Developing, Operating and Maintaining Facilities and Payloads on the International Space Station (ISS) and Other Vehicles and Carriers, 2) Providing Science, Technical and Engineering Support to Investigators, and 3) Providing Management and Administrative Support to Msad. the Contractor Shall Provide the Necessary Management, Personnel, and Equipment/Supplies (NOT Otherwise Provided by the Government) Required to Perform the Engineering, Science and Technical Tasks Broadly Defined in This Statement of Work (SOW) and More Specifically Described in the Task/Delivery Order (order) and Technical Directives Issued by the Government. the Contractor Shall Provide the Planning, Coordination, Technical Direction, and Surveillance of the Activities Necessary to Assure Disciplined Performance of Work and Timely Application of Resources for the Accomplishment of ALL Orders Issued Under the Contract Approved by Msad. the Contractor Shall Establish, Implement, and Maintain a Financial Reporting System in Accordance With the Nasa FAR Supplement (NFS) 1852.242-73 and Nasa Procedures and Guidelines (NPG) 9501.2D. the Contractor Shall Provide the Overall Management Effort Required to Integrate Technical and Programmatic Functions Necessary for Achievement of the Objectives of the Contract. the Contractor Shall Develop, Submit, and Maintain Detailed Master Schedules Based on a Logic Driven Network That Supports Applicable Msad Project and ISS Program Managed Milestones. the Contractor Shall BE Responsible for Procurement Functions: the Contractor Shall Create, Maintain and Submit in the Format Specified by Msad, Miscellaneous Graphics, Presentations and Reports Supporting the Payloads and the Research Program, and the Major Msad Program Activities and Milestones. the Contractor Shall Define, Design, Develop, Fabricate, Assemble, Test, Deliver, Integrate and Operate Microgravity Science Payloads and Facilities. the Contractor Shall Define the Resources, Structure, Approach, and Processes Required to Complete the Final Design, Development, Fabrication, Assembly, Test, Integration, Operation, Maintenance, Support, and Retirement of the Required Hardware, Software, and Associated Infrastructure. the Contractor Shall Support or Conduct Technical Reviews Appropriate for Individual Payload Development and to Meet the Requirements of the Order — $397.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Mission Operations and Integration (MO&I) Contract. This Contract Involves Operations Support for ALL Phases of Flight Including Mission Preparation, Crew and Flight Controller Training, and Real-Time Operations Requirements for Spaceflight Operations Support. the Core Services Portion of the Contract Establishes Requirements for Payload Operations in Support of the International Space Station (ISS) Program, While Task Orders Issued Under the Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (idiq) Component Will Provide the Capability to ADD Operations Support for Other Program or Project Requirements — $371.5M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Marshall Operations Systems, Services, and Integration II (mossi II) — $253.6M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Production of FMS Boats U1, U2, and U3 — $237.7M (Department of Defense)
- Launch Vehicle/Stages Adapter — $205.5M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
View all Teledyne Brown Engineering, Inc. 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 →