NASA awards $728M for engineering services to support space flight and ground systems
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $728,477,897 ($728.5M)
Contractor: KBR Wyle Services, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2007-05-15
End Date: 2012-05-14
Contract Duration: 1,826 days
Daily Burn Rate: $398.9K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: THE PURPOSE OF THIS CONTRACT IS TO ACQUIRE ENGINEERING SERVICES AND RELATED SERVICES TO MSD AND RELATED ORGANIZATIONS THROUGHOUT GSFC, AS REQUIRED, FOR THE FORMULATION, DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, FABRICATION, INTEGRATION, TESTING, VERIFICATION, AND OPERATIONS OF SPACE FLIGHT AND GROUND SYSTEM HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE, INCLUDING DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES TO ENABLE FUTURE SPACE AND SCIENCE MISSIONS. THE ENGINEERING AREAS OF EMPHASIS ARE MULTIDISCIPLINARY WITH CONCENTRATION IN THE MECHANICAL ENGINEERING AREAS OF MATERIALS, STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND LOADS, MECHANICAL DESIGN, ELECTROMECHANICAL DESIGN, THERMAL, CONTAMINATION AND COATINGS, MANUFACTURING AND INTEGRATION AND TEST.
Place of Performance
Location: GREENBELT, PRINCE GEORGES County, MARYLAND, 20771
State: Maryland Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $728.5 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC for work described as: THE PURPOSE OF THIS CONTRACT IS TO ACQUIRE ENGINEERING SERVICES AND RELATED SERVICES TO MSD AND RELATED ORGANIZATIONS THROUGHOUT GSFC, AS REQUIRED, FOR THE FORMULATION, DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, FABRICATION, INTEGRATION, TESTING, VERIFICATION, AND OPERATIONS OF SPACE FLIGHT AND GROUND… Key points: 1. Contract focuses on multidisciplinary engineering for space flight hardware and software. 2. Emphasis on mechanical engineering disciplines including materials, structural analysis, and thermal. 3. Services span formulation, design, development, fabrication, integration, testing, and operations. 4. Contract duration of five years indicates a long-term need for these specialized services. 5. The cost-plus-award-fee structure incentivizes performance and cost control. 6. This contract supports the development of new technologies for future space and science missions.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The total award amount of $728.5 million over five years averages to approximately $145.7 million annually. This figure appears reasonable for comprehensive engineering support to a major space agency like NASA, which undertakes complex and high-stakes missions. Benchmarking against similar large-scale engineering support contracts for aerospace or defense would provide a more precise value assessment, but the scope suggests a significant investment commensurate with the services provided.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' indicating that while the competition was broad, specific sources may have been excluded based on predefined criteria. The presence of multiple bidders (implied by 'full and open') generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more competitive pricing for the government. The specific number of bidders is not provided, which limits a deeper analysis of the competition's intensity.
Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition, even with exclusions, suggests that taxpayers benefit from a process designed to solicit a wide range of offers, aiming for the best value and price.
Public Impact
Benefits NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and related organizations. Delivers critical engineering expertise for the formulation, design, development, and operation of space flight and ground systems. Supports the advancement of new technologies essential for future space exploration and scientific discovery. Impacts the aerospace engineering workforce by providing sustained employment and development opportunities. Contributes to the success of national space and science missions.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost-plus-award-fee contracts can sometimes lead to higher costs if not managed diligently, as the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs plus an award fee based on performance.
- The 'exclusion of sources' clause, while permissible, warrants scrutiny to ensure it did not unduly limit competition and potentially increase costs for taxpayers.
Positive Signals
- The contract's long duration (5 years) suggests a stable and predictable demand for specialized engineering services, providing continuity for NASA's programs.
- The focus on developing new technologies indicates a forward-looking approach, positioning NASA to leverage cutting-edge advancements.
- The multidisciplinary nature of the engineering services ensures comprehensive support for complex space missions.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on engineering services for aerospace applications. The R&D sector is characterized by innovation and the pursuit of new knowledge and technologies. NASA's spending in this area is crucial for maintaining its leadership in space exploration and scientific research. Comparable spending benchmarks would likely be found within other government agencies procuring similar advanced engineering and technical services, such as the Department of Defense.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a primary set-aside criterion for this specific contract. This suggests that the primary focus was on securing specialized engineering expertise, likely from larger, established firms capable of handling the extensive scope of work. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses, which could limit their direct involvement and opportunities on this particular contract.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with NASA's contracting officers and program managers. The cost-plus-award-fee structure implies performance monitoring to determine award fees. Transparency would be facilitated through contract reporting mechanisms and potentially public contract databases. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract's execution.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Engineering and Technical Support Services
- Space Flight Systems Development
- Ground Systems Engineering
- Advanced Technology Development
- Aerospace Research and Development
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns inherent in Cost Plus Award Fee contracts.
- Risk of limited competition due to 'exclusion of sources' clause.
- Dependency on contractor performance for critical mission success.
- Need for robust oversight to ensure value for taxpayer money.
Tags
research-and-development, engineering-services, space-exploration, nasa, goddard-space-flight-center, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, aerospace, technology-development, maryland, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $728.5 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. THE PURPOSE OF THIS CONTRACT IS TO ACQUIRE ENGINEERING SERVICES AND RELATED SERVICES TO MSD AND RELATED ORGANIZATIONS THROUGHOUT GSFC, AS REQUIRED, FOR THE FORMULATION, DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, FABRICATION, INTEGRATION, TESTING, VERIFICATION, AND OPERATIONS OF SPACE FLIGHT AND GROUND SYSTEM HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE, INCLUDING DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES TO ENABLE FUTURE SPACE AND SCIENCE MISSIONS. THE ENGINEERING AREAS OF EMPHASIS ARE MULTIDISCIPLINARY WITH CONCENTRATION IN THE MECH
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is KBR WYLE SERVICES, 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 $728.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2007-05-15. End: 2012-05-14.
What is the track record of KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC in performing similar large-scale engineering contracts for NASA or other federal agencies?
KBR Wyle Services, LLC, as a significant contractor in the aerospace and defense sector, has a history of performing complex engineering and technical support services for various government agencies, including NASA. Their experience often spans areas such as space mission operations, systems engineering, and scientific research support. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, including any performance ratings, past performance questionnaires, and any documented issues or successes, would provide crucial insight into their capability to execute this current contract effectively. A review of their contract history would reveal their ability to manage large budgets, meet demanding technical requirements, and adhere to project timelines, which are critical for NASA's mission-driven objectives.
How does the average annual cost of this contract compare to similar engineering support contracts awarded by NASA or other space agencies?
The average annual cost of approximately $145.7 million for this contract needs to be benchmarked against comparable contracts to assess its value. NASA and other space agencies (like the European Space Agency or DoD space programs) procure similar large-scale engineering services. Factors influencing cost include the specific technical requirements, the duration of the contract, the level of expertise required, and the competitive landscape. Without direct comparisons of contracts with identical scopes and complexities, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the scale of NASA's missions and the specialized nature of the engineering support suggest that costs in this range are typical for such high-stakes endeavors.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate KBR Wyle Services, LLC under the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure, and how are they measured?
Under a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are crucial for determining the award fee earned by the contractor. While specific KPIs are not detailed in the provided data, they typically align with the contract's objectives and would likely include metrics related to technical performance (e.g., meeting design specifications, successful testing), schedule adherence (e.g., on-time delivery of milestones), cost control (e.g., managing project expenses within budget projections), and overall program management effectiveness. NASA's contracting officers and technical monitors would establish objective and subjective criteria to evaluate the contractor's performance against these KPIs, translating the assessment into the final award fee amount.
What is the historical spending trend for engineering services at NASA's GSFC over the past five years, and how does this contract fit into that trend?
Analyzing historical spending trends for engineering services at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) over the past five years would provide context for this $728.5 million contract. GSFC is a major hub for space science and flight missions, consistently requiring significant engineering support. If historical spending has been in a similar range for comparable services, this contract would represent a continuation of established investment. Conversely, a significant increase or decrease might indicate a shift in program priorities, budget allocations, or contracting strategies. Understanding this trend helps assess whether this award is an anomaly or part of a consistent pattern of resource allocation for critical engineering functions.
What are the potential risks associated with the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' award type, and how are these mitigated?
The 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' award type, while intended to ensure broad competition, carries potential risks. The primary risk is that the exclusion of certain sources, even if justified, might inadvertently limit the pool of highly qualified bidders, potentially leading to less competitive pricing or reduced innovation. Mitigation strategies typically involve clearly documenting the rationale for exclusions, ensuring that the exclusion criteria are objective and directly related to the contract requirements, and conducting thorough market research to confirm that sufficient competition remains. NASA's procurement regulations and oversight mechanisms are designed to ensure that such exclusions are used appropriately and do not compromise the integrity of the competition or the government's ability to obtain best value.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › General Science and Technology R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: NNG05096383J
Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: KBR, Inc.
Address: 7701 GREENBELT RD STE 400, GREENBELT, MD, 20770
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $750,000,000
Exercised Options: $750,000,000
Current Obligation: $728,477,897
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Timeline
Start Date: 2007-05-15
Current End Date: 2012-05-14
Potential End Date: 2012-05-14 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-03-25
More Contracts from KBR Wyle Services, LLC
- Bioastronautics Contract-Activities for the Health &productivity of Crews Working and Living in Space — $1.5B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Fpds-Ng Mission Systems Operations Contract (msoc) — $1.0B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- 200106!000121!1700!F7004 !marine Corps Logistics Base !M6700499C0002 !a!n!*!n!p00015 !20010228!20080930!041014242!041014242!139691877!n!honeywell Technology Solutions!7000 Columbia Gateway Driv!columbia !md!21046!35000!031!12!jacksonville !duval !florida !+000004292865!n!n!000000000000!j049!maint & Repair of Eq/Maintenance & Repair Shop EQ !a4a!combat Vehicles !2000!NOT Discernable or Classified !811310!*!*!3! ! !C!*!*!*!B!*!*!A! !A !N!J!2!006!B! !C!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!d!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $670.1M (Department of Defense)
- Mission Operations Management Services (moms) — $623.8M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Other Functions This IS a NEW Procurement Requirement. the Name of This Procurement IS the Omnibus Multidiscipline Engineering Services (omes). the Principal Purpose of This Contract IS to Provide Multidiscipline Engineering Support Services and Related Work to EED, Istd, SED, MSD, Mesa, Jpss, and Related Organizations, AS Required, for the Study, Design, Systems Engineering, Development, Fabrication, Integration, Testing, Verification, and Operations of Space Flight, Airborne, and Ground System Hardware and Software, Including Development and Validation of NEW Technologies to Enable Future Space and Science Missions.to This END, the Contractor Shall Provide On/Off-Site Multidiscipline Engineering Services, Pursuant to Task Assignments Issued by the Contracting Officer. These Services Shall Include the Personnel, Facilities, and Materials (unless Otherwise Provided by the Government) to Accomplish the Tasks. Task Assignments Will BE Issued to Perform Services in the Following Areas for Components, Subsystems, Systems, Science Instruments, and Spacecraft, Suborbitalcraft (E.G., Aircraft, Sounding Rockets, Uavs, Balloons), Including Attached Shuttle Payloads, Free-Flying Spacecraft, Suborbitalcraft Payloads, and Space Station Payloads AS Well AS Ground Support Equipment, Simulators, Non-Flight Models, and Prototypes; Candidate, Feasibility, and Systems Definition Studies; Project Management; Systems Engineering; Analysis; Preliminary Design; Detailed Design; Fabrication; Assembly; Integration; Test and Verification; Test Instrumentation; Data Systems Management; Launch and Post-Launch Operations; Research and Technology Unique to System Development; Parts and Materials; Documentation; Maintenance; Sustaining Engineering; Configuration Management; Performance Assurance; Systems Safety; and Contamination Control — $607.4M (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 →