NASA's $338.6M engineering services contract for space missions awarded to KBR Wyle Services, LLC
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $338,605,801 ($338.6M)
Contractor: KBR Wyle Services, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2012-06-01
End Date: 2016-12-31
Contract Duration: 1,674 days
Daily Burn Rate: $202.3K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF OTHER FUNCTIONS MSES IIA BRIDGE. 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. TO THIS END, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ON/OFF-SITE MULTIDISCIPLINARY 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.
Place of Performance
Location: GREENBELT, PRINCE GEORGES County, MARYLAND, 20771
State: Maryland Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $338.6 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF OTHER FUNCTIONS MSES IIA BRIDGE. 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, VERIFICAT… Key points: 1. Contract provides critical engineering and technical services for space flight and ground systems. 2. Focus on multidisciplinary engineering, particularly in mechanical areas like materials, structural analysis, and thermal. 3. Services span the entire lifecycle from formulation and design to testing and operations. 4. Contract duration of approximately 4.6 years. 5. Significant investment in enabling future space and science missions. 6. Contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, indicating shared risk between government and contractor.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract's total value is $338.6 million over approximately 4.6 years. Without specific benchmarks for similar engineering services contracts at NASA or other agencies, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure means costs are reimbursed plus a fixed fee, which can incentivize cost control but also carries inherent risks if not managed diligently. The provided data does not allow for a direct comparison of per-unit costs or labor rates against market averages.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was not competed, indicating a sole-source award. The rationale for a sole-source award is not detailed in the provided data, but it typically implies that only one responsible source was available or that the circumstances justified a non-competitive procurement. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from a range of proposals and potentially lower pricing that could have resulted from a competitive bidding process.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers as the government may not achieve the most favorable pricing achievable through open competition.
Public Impact
Benefits NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and related organizations by providing essential engineering expertise. Supports the development and validation of new technologies for future space and science missions. Enables the successful formulation, design, integration, testing, and operation of space flight hardware and software. Impacts the aerospace engineering workforce by providing employment opportunities for skilled professionals. Geographic impact is primarily centered around GSFC facilities, likely in Maryland.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and reduced value for taxpayer funds.
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts require robust oversight to ensure cost control and prevent scope creep.
- Limited transparency into the sole-source justification and negotiation process.
Positive Signals
- Contract supports critical NASA missions, contributing to scientific advancement and national space exploration goals.
- KBR Wyle Services, LLC is a known entity in the aerospace services sector, suggesting established capabilities.
- The contract covers a broad range of essential engineering services, indicating comprehensive support for NASA's needs.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development (R&D) sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541712, 'Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology),' categorizes this spending. The aerospace engineering services market is a significant segment within the broader R&D and professional services industry, driven by government and commercial space exploration initiatives. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale engineering support contracts awarded by NASA and other federal agencies for similar space-related projects.
Small Business Impact
The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a small business set-aside. The prime contractor, KBR Wyle Services, LLC, is likely a large business, and any subcontracting opportunities would be at their discretion, not mandated by a set-aside provision. This means the direct impact on the small business ecosystem through this specific contract's set-aside mechanism is nil.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract would primarily fall under NASA's contracting officer and administrative contracting officer. Given the nature of the services and the agency, the NASA Office of Inspector General (OIG) would likely have jurisdiction for audits and investigations into potential fraud, waste, or abuse. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases and reporting requirements, but specific details on day-to-day oversight mechanisms and performance reviews are not provided.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Engineering and Support Services Contracts
- Space Flight Hardware and Software Development
- Aerospace Research and Development
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee Contracts
- Sole Source Procurements
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing pressure.
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee structure requires diligent oversight to manage costs.
- Limited public information on specific performance metrics and oversight activities.
- Potential for cost overruns if not managed effectively.
Tags
nasa, engineering-services, research-and-development, space-exploration, cost-plus-fixed-fee, sole-source, kbr-wyle-services, goddard-space-flight-center, maryland, large-contract, technology-development
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $338.6 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. IGF::OT::IGF OTHER FUNCTIONS MSES IIA BRIDGE. 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 MUL
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 $338.6 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2012-06-01. End: 2016-12-31.
What is the historical spending pattern for KBR Wyle Services, LLC with NASA for similar engineering services?
Analyzing historical spending patterns for KBR Wyle Services, LLC with NASA for similar engineering services would require access to historical contract databases beyond the scope of this single data point. However, the fact that they were awarded this significant sole-source contract suggests a prior relationship or demonstrated capability that NASA deemed essential. Without specific historical data, it's difficult to ascertain trends, but large sole-source awards often follow periods of successful performance on previous contracts or unique capabilities possessed by the contractor. Further investigation into NASA's contract archives would be needed to identify previous awards to KBR Wyle Services, LLC for engineering support and compare their value, duration, and scope to this current contract.
How does the fixed fee component of this contract compare to industry standards for similar R&D engineering services?
Determining whether the fixed fee component of this Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract aligns with industry standards requires detailed benchmarking data that is not publicly available in this dataset. Fixed fees in CPFF contracts are typically negotiated based on the perceived risk, complexity, and duration of the effort. For R&D engineering services, fees can vary significantly. A common range might be between 5% and 15% of the estimated cost, but this is highly dependent on the specific nature of the work and the contractor's overhead structure. Without knowing the total estimated cost and the negotiated fixed fee amount, a direct comparison is impossible. Industry best practices suggest that fees should reflect the level of contractor risk and the value added, while ensuring fair profit for the contractor.
What specific risks were identified by NASA that justified a sole-source award for these critical engineering services?
The provided data does not specify the risks identified by NASA that justified a sole-source award. Sole-source procurements are typically justified under specific circumstances outlined in federal acquisition regulations, such as when only one responsible source is capable of providing the required services, or in cases of urgent and compelling need where competition is not feasible. For complex engineering services related to space missions, potential justifications could include the unique expertise or proprietary technology held by KBR Wyle Services, LLC, or the need for continuity of services on an ongoing project where switching contractors would be detrimental. A thorough review of NASA's justification for other than full and open competition (JOFOC) documentation would be necessary to understand the specific risks and rationale.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of KBR Wyle Services, LLC under this contract?
The provided data does not detail the specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of KBR Wyle Services, LLC under this contract. In contracts of this nature, KPIs typically focus on technical performance (e.g., meeting design specifications, successful testing outcomes), schedule adherence (e.g., timely completion of milestones), cost control (e.g., managing costs within estimates), and quality of deliverables (e.g., accuracy and completeness of engineering reports and designs). NASA contracting officers would establish these metrics in the contract's performance work statement (PWS) or statement of work (SOW), and performance would be monitored throughout the contract's duration. Regular performance reviews would assess the contractor's achievement against these defined KPIs.
How does the total contract value of $338.6 million compare to NASA's overall annual spending on engineering and technical services?
To compare the total contract value of $338.6 million to NASA's overall annual spending on engineering and technical services, one would need access to NASA's comprehensive budget and contract spending reports for the relevant fiscal years (2012-2016). This single contract represents a significant investment, but its proportion within NASA's total engineering support expenditure is unknown without broader financial context. NASA's budget is substantial, encompassing numerous large-scale projects and research initiatives. This contract likely represents a portion of the funding allocated to the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) for specific mission support, rather than NASA's entire engineering services budget. A full analysis would require comparing this value against NASA's total outlays for similar services across all its centers and programs during the contract period.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Scientific Research and Development Services › Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Biotechnology)
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Solicitation ID: NNG12423896R
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
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, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $430,000,000
Exercised Options: $430,000,000
Current Obligation: $338,605,801
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 16
Total Subaward Amount: $1,386,404
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2012-06-01
Current End Date: 2016-12-31
Potential End Date: 2016-12-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2022-10-04
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)
- 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 — $728.5M (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 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 →