NASA's $145M Boeing ELV Contract: Long-Term, Fixed-Price with Economic Adjustments
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $145,069,192 ($145.1M)
Contractor: THE Boeing Company
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2000-09-22
End Date: 2005-06-30
Contract Duration: 1,742 days
Daily Burn Rate: $83.3K/day
Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE WITH ECONOMIC PRICE ADJUSTMENT
Sector: Defense
Official Description: ORIGINAL AWARD AT GSFC- TRANSFERRED TO KSC 10/1/1998 FOR LAUNCH OF MEDIUM CLASS EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLES(ELVS)W/GOVT PAYLOADS INTO ASSIGNED ORBIT(S)-TOTALS ADJUSTED UP THRU MOD 288 WHEN TRANSFERRED FROM GSFC
Place of Performance
Location: HUNTINGTON BEACH, ORANGE County, CALIFORNIA, 92647
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $145.1 million to THE BOEING COMPANY for work described as: ORIGINAL AWARD AT GSFC- TRANSFERRED TO KSC 10/1/1998 FOR LAUNCH OF MEDIUM CLASS EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLES(ELVS)W/GOVT PAYLOADS INTO ASSIGNED ORBIT(S)-TOTALS ADJUSTED UP THRU MOD 288 WHEN TRANSFERRED FROM GSFC Key points: 1. The contract, initially awarded in 2000, has seen significant adjustments through modifications, indicating a long-term and evolving need. 2. Boeing is the sole provider, raising questions about competition and potential price escalations. 3. The fixed-price with economic adjustment structure carries risk for the government if costs rise unexpectedly. 4. This spending falls within the broader aerospace and defense sector, characterized by high R&D and complex procurement.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The total award value of $145M over a 5-year period suggests a substantial investment. Without comparable contracts for similar launch services, assessing the pricing against market benchmarks is difficult. The fixed-price with economic adjustment clause introduces uncertainty.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
The contract is explicitly stated as 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION,' indicating a sole-source award. This lack of competition limits price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs for the government compared to a competitive environment.
Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition and the economic price adjustment clause may result in taxpayers bearing higher costs than necessary for these launch services.
Public Impact
Ensures critical government payloads are launched into orbit, supporting national scientific and operational objectives. Long-term commitment to a single provider may impact the development of alternative launch capabilities. Economic price adjustments could lead to budget fluctuations for NASA's launch programs.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits competition.
- Economic price adjustment clause increases cost risk.
- Long contract duration with numerous modifications suggests potential scope creep or evolving requirements.
- Lack of small business participation.
Positive Signals
- Ensures continuity of essential launch services.
- Established relationship with a major aerospace provider.
- Fixed-price element provides some cost certainty.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on expendable launch vehicles. Spending in this sector is often characterized by high R&D costs, long development cycles, and significant government investment due to national security and scientific interests. Benchmarks are difficult without specific launch vehicle class comparisons.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that small businesses were not involved in this contract (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests a focus on large, established aerospace contractors for complex launch vehicle services, potentially missing opportunities for small business innovation and participation.
Oversight & Accountability
The contract's long duration and numerous modifications (Mod 288) suggest a need for robust oversight to manage scope, cost, and performance effectively. Tracking the impact of economic price adjustments and ensuring fair pricing are key oversight functions.
Related Government Programs
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracting
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration Programs
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Economic price adjustment clause
- Lack of small business participation
- Long contract duration with extensive modifications
- Potential for cost overruns due to economic adjustments
Tags
national-aeronautics-and-space-administr, ca, po, 100m-plus
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $145.1 million to THE BOEING COMPANY. ORIGINAL AWARD AT GSFC- TRANSFERRED TO KSC 10/1/1998 FOR LAUNCH OF MEDIUM CLASS EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLES(ELVS)W/GOVT PAYLOADS INTO ASSIGNED ORBIT(S)-TOTALS ADJUSTED UP THRU MOD 288 WHEN TRANSFERRED FROM GSFC
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is THE BOEING 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 $145.1 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2000-09-22. End: 2005-06-30.
What was the rationale for awarding this contract sole-source, and were alternatives ever considered?
The data states the contract was 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION,' implying a sole-source justification was made, likely due to unique capabilities or existing technology. A thorough review would be needed to confirm if alternatives were explored and why they were deemed unsuitable. This lack of competition is a primary driver of potential cost inefficiencies.
How have economic price adjustments impacted the total contract cost over its lifespan?
The 'FIXED PRICE WITH ECONOMIC PRICE ADJUSTMENT' clause allows for cost increases based on economic factors. Without detailed modification data, it's impossible to quantify the exact impact. However, this feature inherently transfers some cost risk to the government, potentially inflating the final cost beyond initial projections.
What is the performance history of Boeing's medium-class ELVs under this contract, and how does it compare to industry standards?
The provided data does not include performance metrics like launch success rates or on-time delivery. Assessing effectiveness would require analyzing mission outcomes, payload delivery accuracy, and adherence to schedule. Comparing this to industry standards for similar ELVs is crucial for a complete evaluation of the contract's value.
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE WITH ECONOMIC PRICE ADJUSTMENT (K)
Contractor Details
Address: 5301 BOLSA, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA, 47
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $63,938,481
Exercised Options: $63,938,481
Current Obligation: $145,069,192
Timeline
Start Date: 2000-09-22
Current End Date: 2005-06-30
Potential End Date: 2005-06-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2011-11-23
More Contracts from THE Boeing Company
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (Department of Defense)
- International Space Station — $22.4B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- 200112!000108!9700!ZD60 !ballistic Missile Defense ORG. !HQ000601C0001 !A!N!*!N! !20001222!20080930!848025649!848025649!009256819!n!the Boeing Company !3370 E Miraloma AVE !anaheim !ca!92806!37000!089!01!huntsville !madison !alabama !+000383571022!n!n!000000000000!ad93!rdte/Other Defense-Adv Tech DEV !S1 !services !1caa!ballistic Missile Defense SYS !541710!*!*!3! ! ! !*!*!*!B!*!*!A! !A !U!R!2!001!B! !Z!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $18.8B (Department of Defense)
- USN P-8A FRP II Long Lead Material — $18.1B (Department of Defense)
- 200512!010860!2100!w56hzv!tacom - Warren !w56hzv05c0724 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050923!20141231!016544780!016544780!009256819!n!the Boeing Company !J S Mcdonnell Blvd !saint Louis !mo!63166!65000!510!29!st. Louis !ST. Louis (city) !missouri !+000219245691!n!n!000000000000!az15!rdte/Other Research&development-Eng/Manuf Devel !S1 !services !301 !FCS !541330!E! !1! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !d!u!u!1!001!n!1a!z!y!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! TAS::21 2040::TAS — $12.7B (Department of Defense)
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 →