NASA's $46.3M contract for science instrument manufacturing awarded to BAE Systems, spanning over a decade
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $46,287,643 ($46.3M)
Contractor: BAE Systems Space & Mission Systems Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 1999-10-15
End Date: 2009-11-30
Contract Duration: 3,699 days
Daily Burn Rate: $12.5K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: MANUFACTURE, TEST & INTEGRATE COS SCIENCE INSTRUMENT
Place of Performance
Location: BOULDER, BOULDER County, COLORADO, 80301, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
State: Colorado Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $46.3 million to BAE SYSTEMS SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS INC. for work described as: MANUFACTURE, TEST & INTEGRATE COS SCIENCE INSTRUMENT Key points: 1. The contract's long duration suggests a sustained need for the science instrument, potentially indicating a critical program component. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, this contract likely benefited from a competitive bidding process to secure favorable pricing. 3. The cost-plus incentive fee (CPIF) contract type suggests that contractor performance and cost control were key factors in the final price. 4. The significant value and extended period of performance indicate a substantial investment in scientific instrumentation by NASA. 5. The contract's focus on manufacturing, testing, and integration points to a complex and high-stakes project within NASA's scientific endeavors. 6. The absence of small business involvement suggests this contract was likely awarded to a large, specialized defense contractor.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific details on the science instrument's complexity and market. However, a $46.3 million award over nearly 10 years for specialized scientific instrumentation by a major agency like NASA suggests a potentially reasonable investment for advanced technology. The CPIF contract type allows for shared savings if costs are below target, incentivizing efficiency. Further analysis would require comparing the instrument's capabilities and development costs to similar projects within the aerospace and scientific research sectors.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. This approach typically fosters a competitive environment, encouraging multiple bidders to offer their best pricing and technical solutions. The number of bidders is not specified, but the open competition suggests NASA sought the most advantageous offer. This method is generally preferred for maximizing value and innovation.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from full and open competition through potentially lower prices due to market forces and a wider selection of qualified contractors, leading to better resource allocation for government programs.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are NASA's scientific research programs, which will receive a critical science instrument for data collection and analysis. The contract delivers a manufactured, tested, and integrated science instrument, essential for advancing understanding in a specific scientific field. The geographic impact is likely concentrated around the contractor's facilities and NASA research centers involved in the instrument's deployment and use. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for engineers, technicians, and manufacturing specialists at BAE Systems and its potential subcontractors.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The extended contract duration (over 10 years) could present risks related to technological obsolescence or changing program requirements.
- Cost-plus incentive fee contracts can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not meticulously managed and monitored by the agency.
- The lack of small business participation may indicate a lack of opportunities for smaller, innovative firms in this specific contract area.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust and fair bidding process.
- The contract involves a specialized area (science instrument manufacturing), indicating NASA's commitment to advanced technological capabilities.
- The long performance period implies a stable and critical need for the delivered product, suggesting program importance.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Analytical Laboratory Instrument Manufacturing sector, a niche within the broader scientific and defense industrial base. The market for such specialized instruments is often characterized by high barriers to entry due to complex engineering requirements and stringent quality standards. Spending in this sector is driven by government research and development initiatives, as well as the needs of academic institutions and private research firms. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale instrument development contracts awarded by agencies like NASA, NSF, or DoD.
Small Business Impact
The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the 'sb' field indicates 'false'. This suggests that the scope and complexity of the science instrument manufacturing likely required the capabilities of a large, established contractor like BAE Systems. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses, but given the nature of the work, it's possible that smaller firms could be involved in supplying components or specialized services, though not as prime contractors.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under NASA's contracting officer and program management. The Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) structure necessitates close monitoring of costs and performance against established targets. Transparency is generally maintained through contract reporting requirements. While specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction isn't detailed, NASA's Office of Inspector General typically has oversight over agency contracts to ensure efficiency and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Science Mission Directorate Contracts
- Space Science Instrument Development
- Advanced Technology Manufacturing Contracts
- Aerospace Research and Development
- Defense Contractor Scientific Support
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration may increase risk of obsolescence.
- Cost-plus contracts require diligent oversight to manage costs.
- Lack of specified small business participation.
Tags
nasa, science-instrument-manufacturing, aerospace, defense-contractor, full-and-open-competition, cost-plus-incentive-fee, long-term-contract, research-and-development, analytical-laboratory-instrument-manufacturing, colorado, large-business
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $46.3 million to BAE SYSTEMS SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS INC.. MANUFACTURE, TEST & INTEGRATE COS SCIENCE INSTRUMENT
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is BAE SYSTEMS SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS INC..
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 $46.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 1999-10-15. End: 2009-11-30.
What was the specific type of science instrument manufactured under this contract, and what were its intended applications?
The contract details specify the work as 'MANUFACTURE, TEST & INTEGRATE COS SCIENCE INSTRUMENT.' While the exact 'COS' (likely an acronym for a specific mission or instrument suite) is not explicitly defined in the provided data, it pertains to scientific instrumentation. These instruments are typically designed for data collection and analysis in space or for ground-based research supporting space missions. Examples could include spectrometers, imagers, particle detectors, or other sensors crucial for scientific discovery. The intended applications would align with NASA's broader scientific objectives, such as planetary science, astrophysics, Earth observation, or heliophysics, depending on the specific instrument's function.
How did the final cost compare to the initial target cost, given the CPIF contract type?
The provided data does not include information on the initial target cost or the final incurred cost for this contract. A Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract structure means that the final fee paid to the contractor is tied to achieving certain performance targets, including cost goals. If BAE Systems managed to complete the work below the target cost, they would receive a higher fee, and NASA would save money. Conversely, if costs exceeded the target, the fee would be reduced, and NASA might share in some of the cost overrun depending on the contract's specific terms. To assess this, one would need access to NASA's contract performance reports and financial data for this specific award.
What is the track record of BAE Systems Space & Mission Systems Inc. with NASA for similar large-scale instrument contracts?
BAE Systems Space & Mission Systems Inc. is a major defense and aerospace contractor with a significant history of working with government agencies, including NASA. They have a broad portfolio encompassing satellite systems, space components, and mission support. For large-scale instrument contracts, their track record would need to be assessed by examining past performance evaluations, on-time delivery rates, and adherence to budget on similar projects. While this specific contract ran for a long duration, indicating a sustained relationship, a comprehensive review would involve looking at multiple past awards and their outcomes to gauge reliability and expertise in science instrument development and integration for NASA.
Were there any significant performance issues or contract modifications during the contract's nearly 10-year period?
The provided data does not detail any specific performance issues or contract modifications. However, a contract spanning from October 15, 1999, to November 30, 2009 (over 10 years), especially one involving complex manufacturing, testing, and integration of science instruments, is highly likely to have undergone modifications. These could include changes in scope, schedule adjustments, or technical requirement updates driven by evolving scientific needs or technological advancements. Without access to NASA's contract modification logs and performance reports, it's impossible to definitively state whether significant issues arose or how they were resolved.
How does the annual spending on this contract compare to NASA's overall budget for science instrument acquisition during that period?
The total award amount for this contract was $46,287,643.29 over a period of approximately 10 years. This averages to roughly $4.6 million per year. To compare this to NASA's overall budget for science instrument acquisition during the late 1990s and 2000s, one would need to consult NASA's historical budget documents and procurement reports. NASA's total budget during that era was in the tens of billions of dollars annually, with a significant portion allocated to science missions and associated hardware. While $4.6 million annually is a substantial sum for a single instrument, it likely represents a relatively small fraction of NASA's total spending on all science instruments and related research and development activities across its various mission directorates.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing › Analytical Laboratory Instrument Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Space R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE (V)
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Ball Corp (UEI: 006419147)
Address: 1600 COMMERCE ST, BOULDER, CO, 80301
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $53,017,112
Exercised Options: $53,017,112
Current Obligation: $46,287,643
Timeline
Start Date: 1999-10-15
Current End Date: 2009-11-30
Potential End Date: 2009-11-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2015-09-16
More Contracts from BAE Systems Space & Mission Systems Inc.
- Weather System Follow-On - Microwave - System Design of Satellite With Microwave Radiometer and Sensor — $528.5M (Department of Defense)
- Engineering Services and Development Leading to the Delivery of the Omps Protoflight Model and Support — $479.0M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Jpss-1 Mission Spacecraft Rapid III Delivery Order #3. Rapid III Provides Core Spacecraft Systems in Support of the Scientific and Technology Development Goals of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Goddard Space Flight Center, and Other Federal Agencies. the Scope of Work Includes Design, Build and Test, Payload Integration and Test, Launch Vehicle Integration and Support and On-Orbit Checkout and Acceptance — $365.7M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- THE Woma Requirement WAS Issued AS a Full and Open Competitive Procurement to Design, Analyze, Develop, Fabricate, Integrate, Test, and Evaluate the Wide Field Instrument (WFI) Opto-Mechanical Assembly (woma) for the Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope (wfirst) Mission. in Addition, IT Defines the Tasks Necessary to Support the Subsequent Integration, Test, Evaluation, and Validation of the WFI. IT Defines the Post-Delivery Support to Payload and Observatory Integration and Test, and to Pre-Launch, Launch and Commissioning Activities AT the Mission Operations Center (MOC) and to Supply and Maintain the Instrument Ground Support Equipment (GSE) — $307.9M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- National Aeronautical&space Administration (nasa) and the Goddard Space Flight Center (gsfc) HAS a Requirement for the Continuation of the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Microwave Imager (GMI) Instrument. the GMI Instrument IS a 13 Channel Radiometer Whose Core Science Measures the Earth S Atmospheric Moisture Within 10.65 GHZ Through 183 GHZ of the Microwave Spectrum — $233.7M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
View all BAE Systems Space & Mission Systems Inc. federal contracts →
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 →