NASA awards $391M contract to United Launch Services for solar probe launch, highlighting space exploration investment
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $391,196,096 ($391.2M)
Contractor: United Launch Services, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2015-03-18
End Date: 2018-10-31
Contract Duration: 1,323 days
Daily Burn Rate: $295.7K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF SOLAR PROBE PLUS LAUNCH SERVICES - UNITED LAUNCH SERVICES THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL SERVICES, FACILITIES, AND RESOURCES (EXCEPT AS MAY BE EXPRESSLY STATED IN THIS CONTRACT AS FURNISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT) NECESSARY TO PERFORM THE SPP LAUNCH SERVICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH (IAW) THE PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS), EXHIBITS, AND DOCUMENTS.
Place of Performance
Location: ORLANDO, BREVARD County, FLORIDA, 32899
State: Florida Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $391.2 million to UNITED LAUNCH SERVICES, LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF SOLAR PROBE PLUS LAUNCH SERVICES - UNITED LAUNCH SERVICES THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL SERVICES, FACILITIES, AND RESOURCES (EXCEPT AS MAY BE EXPRESSLY STATED IN THIS CONTRACT AS FURNISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT) NECESSARY TO PERFORM THE SPP LAUNCH SERVICE IN ACCORDANC… Key points: 1. Contract value of $391.2 million for a single launch service indicates a significant investment in space mission capabilities. 2. The award to United Launch Services suggests a competitive landscape for critical launch services, though specific competition details are limited. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type aims to control costs and transfer risk to the contractor. 4. The duration of the contract, spanning over three years, points to a complex and lengthy mission preparation and execution. 5. This contract aligns with NASA's ongoing efforts to explore the solar system and advance scientific understanding. 6. The geographic location of performance in Florida is consistent with major launch operations in the United States.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $391.2 million for a single launch service is substantial, reflecting the complexity and criticality of space missions. Benchmarking against similar NASA launch contracts for scientific payloads would provide a clearer picture of value for money. The firm-fixed-price structure is a positive indicator for cost control. However, without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to alternative launch providers for this specific mission profile, a definitive value assessment is challenging.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple qualified vendors had the opportunity to bid. The presence of two bidders suggests a degree of competition, which is generally favorable for price discovery and innovation. However, the specific number of bids received and the details of the evaluation process are not provided, making it difficult to fully assess the intensity of the competition and its impact on the final price.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages multiple companies to offer their best pricing and services, potentially leading to a more cost-effective outcome for this critical space mission.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is NASA, enabling the successful launch and operation of the Solar Probe Plus mission. The service delivered is the launch of a spacecraft designed to study the Sun, contributing to scientific knowledge. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, specifically Florida, where launch operations are conducted. The contract supports specialized jobs in the aerospace and launch services industry, including engineers, technicians, and support staff.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen technical challenges arise, despite the firm-fixed-price structure.
- Dependence on a single contractor for a critical mission component carries inherent risk.
- Limited transparency into the specific cost drivers and profit margins for this complex service.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust selection process.
- Firm-fixed-price contract type helps to lock in costs and manage budget.
- Contractor has experience in providing launch services, reducing technical risk.
- Clear performance work statement (PWS) likely outlines specific requirements and deliverables.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on launch services for space missions. The market for launch services is highly specialized, with a limited number of providers capable of meeting the stringent requirements of agencies like NASA. Spending in this area is driven by national priorities in space exploration, scientific research, and national security. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing the costs of other government or commercial launches of similar payload mass and destination.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary contractor, United Launch Services, is likely a large aerospace company. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether United Launch Services engages small businesses as subcontractors for specialized components or services, which is not detailed in the provided information.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily be managed by NASA's contracting officers and program managers, ensuring adherence to the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and delivery schedules. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract implies a focus on deliverables and milestones. Transparency is facilitated through contract awards databases and public reporting, though detailed operational oversight specifics are typically internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Launch Services Program
- Space Exploration Initiatives
- Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
- Commercial Spaceflight Development
Risk Flags
- Potential for launch delays impacting mission timelines.
- Technical risks associated with complex space mission operations.
- Budgetary constraints could impact future mission planning.
- Dependence on a limited number of specialized launch providers.
Tags
nasa, launch-services, space-exploration, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, aerospace, science-mission, solar-probe, united-launch-services, florida, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $391.2 million to UNITED LAUNCH SERVICES, LLC. IGF::OT::IGF SOLAR PROBE PLUS LAUNCH SERVICES - UNITED LAUNCH SERVICES THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL SERVICES, FACILITIES, AND RESOURCES (EXCEPT AS MAY BE EXPRESSLY STATED IN THIS CONTRACT AS FURNISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT) NECESSARY TO PERFORM THE SPP LAUNCH SERVICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH (IAW) THE PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS), EXHIBITS, AND DOCUMENTS.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is UNITED LAUNCH 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 $391.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2015-03-18. End: 2018-10-31.
What is the historical track record of United Launch Services in fulfilling NASA launch contracts?
United Launch Services, LLC, has a significant history of providing launch services to government agencies, including NASA. As a subsidiary of United Launch Alliance (ULA), it benefits from the extensive experience and proven reliability of its parent company, which has successfully launched numerous missions for NASA and the Department of Defense. ULA's Atlas and Delta rocket families have a strong performance record. While specific contract performance metrics for IGF::OT::IGF SOLAR PROBE PLUS LAUNCH SERVICES are not detailed here, the company's overall reputation is built on a foundation of successful mission completions and adherence to stringent safety and performance standards required for spaceflight.
How does the $391.2 million cost compare to similar NASA launch contracts for scientific payloads?
The $391.2 million cost for the Solar Probe Plus launch service is substantial, reflecting the complexity and high-risk nature of sending a probe to study the Sun. To benchmark this value, one would compare it to other NASA launch contracts for comparable scientific missions, considering factors such as payload mass, destination, launch vehicle class, and required mission duration. For instance, launches of deep-space probes or missions requiring complex orbital maneuvers often incur higher costs than simpler Earth-orbit missions. Without specific comparative data on similar solar science missions or other deep-space probes launched in the same timeframe, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents excellent or fair value, but it is within the expected range for such a critical and scientifically significant endeavor.
What are the primary risks associated with this specific launch service contract?
The primary risks associated with this launch service contract include technical failures during launch or mission operations, schedule delays due to unforeseen technical issues or external factors (like weather or range availability), and potential cost overruns, although the firm-fixed-price contract aims to mitigate the latter. Given the mission's objective to study the Sun up close, the extreme environment the probe will encounter also poses significant operational risks. Furthermore, reliance on a single contractor for such a critical component introduces program risk if the contractor faces financial instability or operational challenges. NASA's oversight and contingency planning are crucial for managing these inherent risks.
How effective is the firm-fixed-price contract type in ensuring program effectiveness for this mission?
The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective in ensuring program effectiveness by establishing a clear ceiling on costs and incentivizing the contractor to perform efficiently to maximize profit. For a launch service like the Solar Probe Plus, where the scope of work is well-defined (i.e., providing a specific launch vehicle and associated services), an FFP contract helps NASA manage its budget predictably. It shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor, encouraging them to control expenses. However, the effectiveness can be diminished if the PWS is not sufficiently detailed or if unforeseen technical challenges require contract modifications, which could potentially increase costs or impact scope.
What are the historical spending patterns for NASA's launch services, and how does this contract fit?
NASA's spending on launch services has historically been significant, driven by its ambitious exploration and science missions. The agency utilizes a mix of contract types and competition strategies, often relying on established providers like United Launch Services (ULA) and SpaceX for critical launches. Spending patterns fluctuate based on the number and complexity of planned missions. This $391.2 million contract for the Solar Probe Plus launch fits within NASA's ongoing investment in solar physics and heliophysics research, representing a substantial but not unprecedented expenditure for a major scientific mission requiring a dedicated launch vehicle. It aligns with historical trends of significant investment in deep-space science missions.
What are the implications of the 'full and open competition' for taxpayers regarding this contract?
The 'full and open competition' designation for this contract is a positive signal for taxpayers. It means that NASA was required to solicit bids from all responsible sources, allowing for a wide range of potential providers to compete. This competitive process is designed to drive down prices by encouraging bidders to offer their most cost-effective solutions to win the contract. While the specific number of bidders isn't detailed, the principle of open competition generally leads to better price discovery and ensures that taxpayer funds are used more efficiently compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios. It fosters a market where providers must be competitive on both price and performance.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: TRANSPORT, TRAVEL, RELOCATION › TRANSPORTATION OF THINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: United Launch Alliance, L.L.C (UEI: 601307601)
Address: 9501 E PANORAMA CIR, CENTENNIAL, CO, 80112
Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $391,196,096
Exercised Options: $391,196,096
Current Obligation: $391,196,096
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 1
Total Subaward Amount: $2,500,000
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2015-03-18
Current End Date: 2018-10-31
Potential End Date: 2018-10-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2019-02-13
More Contracts from United Launch Services, LLC
- Eelv FY13 + Phase I BUY — $9.5B (Department of Defense)
- 200610!000002!5700!fa8816!smc/Evk !FA881606C0002 !A!N! !N! ! !20060228!20070930!926784042!834951691!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !12257 Highway 121 !littleton !co!80125!45255!005!08!littleton !arapahoe !colorado !+000335912412!n!n!000815040082!1810!space Vehicles !A2 !missile and Space Systems !176 !eelv !336414!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !d!n!r!1!001!n!1g!z!y!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!y! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! ! — $3.6B (Department of Defense)
- Delta IV Heavy Launch Services — $1.7B (Department of Defense)
- Boeing Launch Services, Inc — $1.5B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Nasa Launch Services — $1.5B (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 →