NASA's $15.8M sounding rocket launch site contract awarded to University of Alaska Fairbanks, a sole-source effort
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $15,793,859 ($15.8M)
Contractor: University of Alaska Fairbanks
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2019-12-01
End Date: 2026-11-30
Contract Duration: 2,556 days
Daily Burn Rate: $6.2K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST NO FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS EFFORT IS TO PROVIDE NASA AND OTHER U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES (WORKING THROUGH NASA) WITH A DOMESTIC, NORTHERN LATITUDE, SOUNDING ROCKET LAUNCH SITE FOR CONDUCTING SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS.
Place of Performance
Location: FAIRBANKS, FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR County, ALASKA, 99775
State: Alaska Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $15.8 million to UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS for work described as: THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS EFFORT IS TO PROVIDE NASA AND OTHER U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES (WORKING THROUGH NASA) WITH A DOMESTIC, NORTHERN LATITUDE, SOUNDING ROCKET LAUNCH SITE FOR CONDUCTING SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS. Key points: 1. This contract supports scientific investigations via a domestic sounding rocket launch site. 2. The University of Alaska Fairbanks is the sole awardee, raising questions about competition. 3. The contract duration is over 7 years, indicating a long-term need for these services. 4. The 'Cost No Fee' contract type suggests NASA bears the financial risk. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 561210 points to facilities support services. 6. The contract's geographic focus is Alaska, a key location for scientific research.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract value of $15.8 million over approximately 7 years (2556 days) for facilities support services at a sounding rocket launch site appears reasonable given the specialized nature of the service and the location. However, without comparable sole-source contracts for similar niche facilities, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The 'Cost No Fee' structure means the government covers all allowable costs, which can lead to higher overall spending if not managed tightly, but it also ensures service continuity.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis to the University of Alaska Fairbanks. This indicates that NASA determined that only this specific entity could provide the required services. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from a competitive bidding process, which typically drives down prices and encourages innovation. The justification for a sole-source award would need to demonstrate why other potential providers could not meet the requirements.
Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition for this contract means taxpayers may not have received the lowest possible price for these specialized facilities support services. Without competitive pressure, there is a risk of inflated costs or less efficient service delivery compared to a competed contract.
Public Impact
Scientific researchers benefit from access to a domestic, northern latitude sounding rocket launch site. The contract enables the conduct of critical scientific investigations, potentially advancing knowledge in various fields. The geographic impact is primarily in Alaska, supporting regional infrastructure and scientific endeavors. The contract supports specialized technical and facility management jobs within the University of Alaska Fairbanks and potentially its subcontractors.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits price competition and potentially value for taxpayer dollars.
- Cost-plus contract type shifts financial risk to the government, potentially increasing overall expenditure.
- Lack of transparency in the sole-source justification could hide potential inefficiencies.
- Long contract duration without clear performance metrics could lead to complacency.
Positive Signals
- Ensures continuity of a critical scientific research asset (sounding rocket launch site).
- Leverages the unique capabilities and location of the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
- Supports ongoing scientific missions vital to NASA and other government agencies.
- Provides a stable, long-term operational base for northern latitude research.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, specifically catering to specialized launch site operations. The market for such niche services is limited, often dominated by entities with unique geographic access, technical expertise, and security clearances. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the specialized nature and sole-source award. However, government spending on research infrastructure and support services is substantial across various agencies, with IT and R&D often representing larger segments.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as indicated by 'sb': false. Furthermore, the awardee is a university, which typically does not prioritize small business subcontracting in the same way a for-profit entity might. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting plans, suggesting limited direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this specific award.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a 'Cost No Fee' contract, NASA is responsible for monitoring all allowable costs incurred by the University of Alaska Fairbanks to ensure they are reasonable and allocable to the contract's objectives. Transparency is dependent on NASA's reporting and auditing practices. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Sounding Rocket Program
- Research and Development Facilities
- University Research Support Contracts
- Geospatial Research Infrastructure
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award may indicate limited market availability or potential lack of competition.
- Cost-plus contract type increases government financial risk.
- Geographic remoteness and environmental conditions in Alaska could pose operational risks.
- Dependence on a single provider for critical launch infrastructure.
Tags
nasa, sounding-rocket, launch-site, facilities-support-services, university-of-alaska-fairbanks, sole-source, cost-no-fee, alaska, scientific-research, definitive-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $15.8 million to UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS. THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS EFFORT IS TO PROVIDE NASA AND OTHER U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES (WORKING THROUGH NASA) WITH A DOMESTIC, NORTHERN LATITUDE, SOUNDING ROCKET LAUNCH SITE FOR CONDUCTING SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS.
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 $15.8 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2019-12-01. End: 2026-11-30.
What is the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis to the University of Alaska Fairbanks?
The provided data does not include the specific justification for the sole-source award. Typically, sole-source contracts are awarded when only one responsible source is available or capable of meeting the agency's needs. For a specialized facility like a sounding rocket launch site in a specific geographic location (northern latitude), the University of Alaska Fairbanks may possess unique infrastructure, operational expertise, or geographic advantages that cannot be replicated by other entities. NASA would have had to document these unique capabilities to justify bypassing the competitive bidding process, citing reasons such as unique technical qualifications, essential geographic location, or critical timing requirements that preclude a competitive solicitation.
How does the 'Cost No Fee' contract type impact the government's financial exposure and oversight requirements?
A 'Cost No Fee' (Cost) contract type means the government agrees to pay the contractor all allowable, allocable, and reasonable costs incurred in performing the contract, but the contractor earns no fee or profit. This structure shifts the financial risk entirely to the government. While it can ensure service continuity and encourage contractor effort by removing profit motive as a primary driver, it necessitates rigorous government oversight to scrutinize costs. NASA must actively monitor expenditures to ensure they align with the contract's objectives and adhere to cost principles. This requires detailed auditing and verification processes to prevent overspending and ensure the government is not paying for unnecessary or excessive costs.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics used to evaluate the University of Alaska Fairbanks' performance under this contract?
The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics for this contract. However, for a facilities support services contract at a launch site, typical KPIs would likely include launch success rates, facility availability and uptime, safety incident rates, adherence to environmental regulations, response times for maintenance and repairs, and the successful execution of scientific mission support activities. NASA's contract administration team would be responsible for establishing, monitoring, and evaluating the contractor's performance against these agreed-upon metrics throughout the contract's duration.
What is the historical spending pattern for this specific sounding rocket launch site facility or similar services provided by the University of Alaska Fairbanks to NASA?
The provided data only includes details for the current contract valued at $15.8 million, running from December 1, 2019, to November 30, 2026. It does not offer historical spending data for this specific facility or for similar services previously provided by the University of Alaska Fairbanks to NASA. To assess historical spending patterns, one would need to access NASA's contract databases or procurement records for prior contracts with this institution for this or related services. Understanding past expenditures would help in evaluating cost trends and the long-term investment in this capability.
Are there any known risks associated with operating a sounding rocket launch site in a northern latitude environment, and how are these addressed in the contract?
Operating in a northern latitude environment presents unique risks, including extreme weather conditions (cold, snow, ice), limited daylight hours during winter, potential permafrost issues affecting infrastructure, and logistical challenges due to remoteness. The contract likely addresses these through performance standards related to facility readiness and operational continuity despite environmental challenges. The 'Cost No Fee' structure may implicitly cover costs associated with mitigating these environmental risks, as the government bears the expense. Specific risk mitigation strategies would be detailed in the contract's statement of work and potentially in contractor-submitted risk management plans.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: INSTRUMENTS AND LABORATORY EQPT
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Solicitation ID: 80GSFC19R0076
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: University of Alaska Systems
Address: 903 KOYUKUK DR, FAIRBANKS, AK, 99775
Business Categories: Category Business, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business, Higher Education (Public), Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $30,000,000
Exercised Options: $30,000,000
Current Obligation: $15,793,859
Actual Outlays: $12,005,683
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 1
Total Subaward Amount: $64,000
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2019-12-01
Current End Date: 2026-11-30
Potential End Date: 2029-11-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-04-09
More Contracts from University of Alaska Fairbanks
- Labor Support — $62.0M (Department of Defense)
- Provide Support for High Performance Computing (HPC) Capability AT the Artic Region Supercomputing Center (arsc) — $51.1M (General Services Administration)
- Under the Scope of This Contract, the Contractor Shall Manage and Operate the Synthetic Aperture Radar Daac. These Tasks Include Systems Engineering, Operations and Maintenance, Development, User Services, Product Generation, Data and Information Management, Data Acquisition, Data Processing, Archive and Distribution of Science Data and Products, Information Technology Security and Related Science Support and Research Activities — $48.6M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Distributed Active Archive Center (ASF Daac) Follow-On Contract With the University of Alaska, Fairbanks — $44.4M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Acquire Services for the Continued Development and Operation of the Synthetic Aperture Radar Distributed Active Archive Center for Nasas Earth Observing System Data and Information System — $37.7M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
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 →