NASA awards $61.7M electric service task order to Florida Power & Light Company for Kennedy Space Center

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $61,723,401 ($61.7M)

Contractor: Florida Power & Light Company

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2019-05-01

End Date: 2024-06-30

Contract Duration: 1,887 days

Daily Burn Rate: $32.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: NASA KSC ELECTRIC SERVICE TASK ORDER AWARD AND INCREMENTAL FUNDING

Place of Performance

Location: ORLANDO, BREVARD County, FLORIDA, 32899

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $61.7 million to FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY for work described as: NASA KSC ELECTRIC SERVICE TASK ORDER AWARD AND INCREMENTAL FUNDING Key points: 1. Task order awarded on a sole-source basis, limiting competitive price discovery. 2. Contract duration of nearly five years suggests a long-term need for essential services. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty for the agency. 4. No small business set-aside, indicating potential missed opportunities for smaller contractors. 5. Electric power distribution services are critical for ongoing NASA operations at KSC. 6. The contract's value is substantial, reflecting the scale of NASA's infrastructure needs.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this electric service task order is challenging without specific details on the scope of services and historical pricing. However, the $61.7 million awarded over nearly five years indicates a significant investment in essential utility infrastructure. Comparing this to similar large-scale electric service contracts for federal facilities would be necessary for a more precise value assessment. The firm fixed price structure offers predictability, but the lack of competition raises questions about whether the most cost-effective solution was secured.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This task order was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This approach is typically used when only one vendor can provide the required service, often due to geographic exclusivity or unique capabilities. The lack of competition means that NASA did not benefit from a bidding process that could have driven down prices through market forces. While justified by necessity, it limits the agency's ability to ensure it received the best possible pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards mean taxpayers may not be getting the most competitive pricing available in the market, as the usual pressures of bidding are absent.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is NASA, ensuring continuous and reliable electric power for its Kennedy Space Center operations. Services delivered include the provision and maintenance of electric power distribution. Geographic impact is localized to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Workforce implications are likely minimal for the agency, with the contractor responsible for service delivery and maintenance personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Utilities and Energy sector, specifically focusing on electric power distribution. The market for such services is often characterized by natural monopolies or heavily regulated entities, especially for large facilities like NASA's Kennedy Space Center. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large federal installations' utility contracts, which can range from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars depending on size and complexity. The scale of this award is consistent with the significant power demands of a major space launch and research facility.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that this award was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the nature of the required electric service, likely involving extensive infrastructure and regulatory compliance, was deemed beyond the scope or capability of typical small business contractors in this domain. Consequently, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from this specific award, and opportunities within this particular contract are limited.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this task order would primarily fall under NASA's contracting officer and program management. As an electric service contract, it is likely subject to standard federal procurement regulations and agency-specific policies. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS. While specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction would depend on the nature of any potential issues, NASA's Office of Inspector General typically oversees agency spending for waste, fraud, and abuse.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

nasa, electric-power-distribution, florida, sole-source, firm-fixed-price, large-contract, utility-services, space-exploration, federal-contract, task-order

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $61.7 million to FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY. NASA KSC ELECTRIC SERVICE TASK ORDER AWARD AND INCREMENTAL FUNDING

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY.

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 $61.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2019-05-01. End: 2024-06-30.

What is the historical spending pattern for electric services at NASA's Kennedy Space Center?

Analyzing historical spending for electric services at NASA's Kennedy Space Center requires access to detailed procurement data over multiple years. Typically, such essential services involve recurring contracts with utility providers. Past awards might show fluctuations based on infrastructure upgrades, energy price changes, and operational demands. Without specific historical data for this contract vehicle or similar preceding contracts, it's difficult to establish a precise trend. However, it's reasonable to assume consistent, significant annual spending for a facility of KSC's size and operational tempo, likely in the millions of dollars annually, to ensure reliable power for launch operations, research facilities, and administrative buildings.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar electric service contracts for other federal agencies?

Direct price comparison is difficult without knowing the exact scope of services, energy consumption levels, and specific service level agreements (SLAs) for this $61.7 million task order. However, electric service contracts for large federal installations are substantial investments. For instance, other major NASA centers, large military bases, or federal agency headquarters with significant power needs could have similar or even larger contracts. The 'fair' rating suggests that while the price is not overtly excessive, the sole-source nature prevents a definitive 'excellent' rating based on competitive benchmarking. A detailed analysis would require comparing kilowatt-hour rates, demand charges, and fixed service fees against benchmarks from comparable facilities.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) and service level agreements (SLAs) associated with this electric service contract?

The provided data does not detail the specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or Service Level Agreements (SLAs) for this electric service task order. However, for essential utility services like electric power distribution, typical KPIs would likely include metrics such as power reliability (e.g., number of outages, duration of outages), response times for service calls or emergencies, power quality (voltage and frequency stability), and adherence to safety standards. SLAs would define the expected levels of service for these metrics, often with associated penalties or incentives for the contractor, Florida Power & Light Company, to ensure consistent and dependable power delivery to NASA's Kennedy Space Center.

What is the track record of Florida Power & Light Company in performing similar federal contracts?

Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) is a major utility provider in Florida and has a long history of serving residential, commercial, and industrial customers, including government facilities. While specific details on their past federal contract performance are not in the provided data, FPL's extensive experience in managing large-scale power distribution networks suggests a strong capability to meet the demands of NASA's Kennedy Space Center. Their track record would typically be assessed by the awarding agency based on past performance evaluations, on-time delivery, quality of service, and adherence to contract terms in previous engagements, which likely informed NASA's decision for this sole-source award.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for critical infrastructure like electric services?

The primary risk associated with a sole-source award for critical infrastructure like electric services is the potential for inflated costs due to the lack of competition. Without multiple bidders vying for the contract, the contractor may have less incentive to offer the most competitive pricing. Additionally, there's a risk of complacency or reduced innovation if the contractor knows they are the only option for an extended period. For NASA, this means potentially paying more than necessary and having fewer options if service quality or reliability issues arise, although established utility providers often have regulatory oversight that mitigates some of these concerns.

Does this contract include provisions for renewable energy integration or energy efficiency improvements?

The provided data for this electric service task order does not specify whether it includes provisions for renewable energy integration or energy efficiency improvements. Typically, such details would be outlined in the contract's statement of work or performance requirements. Given the increasing focus on sustainability within federal agencies, it is possible that such clauses could be included, or that future task orders might incorporate them. However, based solely on the award information, we cannot confirm the presence of these specific provisions.

Industry Classification

NAICS: UtilitiesElectric Power Generation, Transmission and DistributionElectric Power Distribution

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPINGUTILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 700, UNIVERSE BOULEVARD, JUNO BEACH, FL, 33408

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $61,946,341

Exercised Options: $61,946,341

Current Obligation: $61,723,401

Actual Outlays: $57,582,395

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00P15BSD1124

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2019-05-01

Current End Date: 2024-06-30

Potential End Date: 2024-06-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2025-04-28

More Contracts from Florida Power & Light Company

View all Florida Power & Light Company federal contracts →

Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts

View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending