NASA's $45.6M electric power contract for Glenn Research Center awarded to Energy Harbor LLC
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $45,611,357 ($45.6M)
Contractor: Energy Harbor LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2005-10-31
End Date: 2010-01-28
Contract Duration: 1,550 days
Daily Burn Rate: $29.4K/day
Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Energy
Official Description: ELECTRIC POWER FOR THE GLENN RESEARCH CENTER
Place of Performance
Location: AKRON, SUMMIT County, OHIO, 44308
State: Ohio Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $45.6 million to ENERGY HARBOR LLC for work described as: ELECTRIC POWER FOR THE GLENN RESEARCH CENTER Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, indicating predictable costs for the government. 2. The contract duration of 1550 days suggests a long-term need for reliable power. 3. Awarded by NASA's National Aeronautics and Space Administration, a key player in aerospace research. 4. The contract's value of over $45 million highlights the significant investment in essential infrastructure. 5. The 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' status warrants further investigation into the justification for sole-sourcing. 6. The contract was awarded in 2005, with performance ending in 2010, providing historical context.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract value of $45.6 million over approximately 4.25 years for electric power services at a research center is difficult to benchmark without more specific details on the quantity and quality of power supplied. The firm-fixed-price structure helps control costs, but the lack of competitive bidding prevents a direct comparison of pricing against market alternatives. The awarded amount appears substantial, reflecting the critical nature of uninterrupted power for a research facility.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was not competed, indicated by 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION'. The specific reasons for this sole-source award are not detailed in the provided data. Without a competitive process, it is challenging to assess if the government received the best possible price or if alternative solutions were considered. The absence of multiple bidders means there's no direct market feedback on pricing or service offerings.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not have received the most cost-effective solution due to the lack of competition. A sole-source award bypasses the opportunity for multiple vendors to bid, potentially driving down prices through market forces.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is NASA's Glenn Research Center, ensuring continuous operation of its facilities. Essential electric power services are delivered to support critical research and development activities. The geographic impact is localized to Ohio, where the Glenn Research Center is located. The contract supports the operational workforce at the Glenn Research Center by providing necessary utilities.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpayment and limited vendor options.
- The justification for a sole-source award needs to be thoroughly reviewed to ensure it was appropriate.
- Historical data on energy consumption and pricing would be beneficial for a more robust value assessment.
Positive Signals
- Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
- Award to Energy Harbor LLC suggests a potentially established relationship or specialized capability.
- The contract supported a critical government research facility, indicating a necessary service.
Sector Analysis
The energy sector, specifically electric power distribution, is a fundamental utility supporting all government operations. Contracts in this area are crucial for maintaining infrastructure. While specific market size data for NASA's electric power procurement isn't readily available, the broader electric utility market is vast. This contract represents a significant, albeit localized, expenditure within the federal government's energy spending portfolio, ensuring the operational continuity of a key research institution.
Small Business Impact
The provided data indicates that small businesses were not a primary focus for this specific contract, as it was awarded on a sole-source basis and does not mention small business set-asides or subcontracting plans. The absence of competition limits opportunities for small businesses to participate in providing these essential services. Further analysis would be needed to determine if any subcontracting opportunities were made available to small businesses by the prime contractor.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically fall under NASA's internal procurement and financial management systems. Given it was a sole-source award, the justification and approval process would be subject to specific federal acquisition regulations. Transparency is limited by the lack of competitive bidding information. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract's execution.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Glenn Research Center Operations
- Federal Energy Procurement
- Utility Services Contracts
- Research and Development Infrastructure Support
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award without clear justification
- Lack of competitive bidding limits price discovery
- Limited transparency on performance metrics and potential issues
Tags
energy, nasa, national-aeronautics-and-space-administration, electric-power, firm-fixed-price, sole-source, ohio, research-and-development, infrastructure, utility-services
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $45.6 million to ENERGY HARBOR LLC. ELECTRIC POWER FOR THE GLENN RESEARCH CENTER
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is ENERGY HARBOR LLC.
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 $45.6 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2005-10-31. End: 2010-01-28.
What was the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?
The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION,' signifying a sole-source award. However, the specific justification for this determination is not detailed. Typically, sole-source awards are justified under circumstances such as only one responsible source being available, an urgent and compelling need, or when a specific national defense requirement exists. Without further documentation from NASA, the precise rationale remains unknown. This lack of transparency can raise concerns about whether the government explored all viable competitive options or if there were unique circumstances necessitating a non-competitive award.
How does the awarded price compare to market rates for similar electric power services?
Directly comparing the awarded price of $45.6 million to market rates for similar electric power services is challenging without more granular data on the contract's specifics, such as kilowatt-hour usage, demand charges, and service level agreements. The contract was awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, which provides cost certainty but does not inherently guarantee the best market price, especially in the absence of competition. Benchmarking would require access to data on comparable contracts for large-scale industrial or research facilities in Ohio or similar regions, considering factors like grid reliability, peak load management, and ancillary services provided.
What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or service level agreements (SLAs) associated with this contract?
The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or service level agreements (SLAs) that were part of this contract. For electric power services, typical SLAs would likely include metrics related to power reliability (e.g., uptime percentage, maximum allowable outage duration), power quality (e.g., voltage and frequency stability), response times for service interruptions, and potentially energy efficiency targets. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests that the core service delivery was defined, but the specific quality and performance standards would have been detailed in the contract's statement of work.
What is the historical spending pattern for electric power at the Glenn Research Center?
This contract, awarded in 2005 and ending in 2010 with a value of $45.6 million, represents a significant expenditure for electric power at the Glenn Research Center during that period. To understand the historical spending pattern, one would need to examine prior contracts for similar services leading up to this award and any subsequent contracts awarded after its expiration. Analyzing these historical data points would reveal trends in energy consumption, pricing fluctuations, and whether spending has increased or decreased over time, potentially influenced by facility expansion, energy efficiency initiatives, or changes in utility rates.
Were there any performance issues or contract modifications during the contract's lifecycle?
The provided summary data does not include information regarding performance issues or contract modifications during the lifecycle of this agreement. Typically, such details would be found in contract performance reports, modification logs, or contract close-out documentation. Without access to these records, it's impossible to ascertain if Energy Harbor LLC met all contractual obligations, if any disputes arose, or if the scope, duration, or price of the contract was altered after its initial award. Such information is crucial for a comprehensive assessment of contractor performance and overall contract management.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Utilities › Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution › Electric Power Distribution
Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › UTILITIES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Firstenergy Corp (UEI: 799249461)
Address: 76 S MAIN ST, AKRON, OH, 13
Business Categories: Category Business, Emerging Small Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Small Business, Special Designations
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $45,611,357
Exercised Options: $45,611,357
Current Obligation: $45,611,357
Timeline
Start Date: 2005-10-31
Current End Date: 2010-01-28
Potential End Date: 2010-01-28 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2010-01-28
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 →