NASA's $65.5M WFC3 contract to BAE Systems awarded without competition, spanning over 9 years
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $65,450,730 ($65.5M)
Contractor: BAE Systems Space & Mission Systems Inc.
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2000-08-15
End Date: 2009-11-30
Contract Duration: 3,394 days
Daily Burn Rate: $19.3K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: PORTIONS OF THE WIDE FIELD CAMERA 3 (WFC3)
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 $65.5 million to BAE SYSTEMS SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS INC. for work described as: PORTIONS OF THE WIDE FIELD CAMERA 3 (WFC3) Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a cost-plus-incentive-fee basis, suggesting potential for cost overruns. 2. Long contract duration of over 9 years may indicate a stable, long-term need for the services. 3. The 'NOT COMPETED' award type raises questions about the justification for avoiding a competitive process. 4. The contract's focus on engineering services for the Wide Field Camera 3 points to specialized technical requirements. 5. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests this contract was not specifically targeted for small business participation. 6. The contract was awarded by NASA, a civilian agency with a focus on scientific research and space exploration.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to the lack of competitive data and the specific nature of the Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) components. The cost-plus-incentive-fee (CPIF) structure, while allowing for flexibility, can lead to higher final costs compared to fixed-price contracts if not managed closely. Without comparable contract data for similar space-based camera systems or engineering services, it's difficult to definitively assess if the $65.5 million expenditure represents optimal value for money. The long duration and lack of competition further complicate a straightforward value assessment.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, indicated by 'NOT COMPETED'. This means that NASA did not solicit bids from multiple potential contractors. The justification for a sole-source award typically involves unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or urgent needs that only one contractor can fulfill. Without further details on the specific circumstances, it is difficult to ascertain the extent of market research conducted or if alternative solutions were considered.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can limit price discovery and potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers compared to contracts awarded through full and open competition. This can occur because the government does not benefit from the competitive pressure that drives down prices.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries of this contract are NASA and the scientific community, who gain access to advanced imaging capabilities for astronomical research. The services delivered are critical for the operation, maintenance, and potential upgrades of the Wide Field Camera 3, a key instrument on the Hubble Space Telescope. The geographic impact is primarily at NASA facilities involved in space science and engineering, likely in Colorado where the contractor is located. The contract supports a specialized workforce of engineers and technical experts in aerospace and optical systems.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpayment and reduced innovation.
- Cost-plus-incentive-fee contracts can incentivize cost growth if not rigorously overseen.
- Long contract duration without re-competition may indicate a lack of market dynamism for these specialized services.
Positive Signals
- The contract supports a critical scientific instrument (WFC3) for NASA's space exploration mission.
- BAE Systems is a known entity in the aerospace and defense sector, suggesting established capabilities.
- The long duration implies a consistent need and potentially a stable, ongoing relationship for critical support.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on space-based instrumentation and engineering services. The market for such specialized components and services is often characterized by high barriers to entry, significant R&D investment, and a limited number of qualified contractors. NASA's spending on scientific instruments and associated engineering support represents a significant portion of its budget, driving innovation in optics, sensors, and data processing. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the unique nature of space-qualified hardware and the specific scientific objectives.
Small Business Impact
The contract data indicates that this was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the scope of work or the required capabilities were likely beyond the capacity or specialization of most small businesses in this highly technical field. Consequently, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from this specific award, nor is there an immediate impact on the small business ecosystem related to this particular contract.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under NASA's contracting officer and program management. As a sole-source award, the justification and terms would be subject to review by NASA's Inspector General to ensure fairness and adherence to procurement regulations. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics and cost breakdowns may be considered sensitive or proprietary.
Related Government Programs
- Hubble Space Telescope Operations
- Space Science Instruments
- Aerospace Engineering Services
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Optical and Imaging Systems
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award justification unclear
- Potential for cost overruns due to CPIF structure
- Lack of competitive bidding limits price discovery
- Long contract duration may reduce incentive for innovation
Tags
nasa, space-exploration, engineering-services, not-competed, sole-source, cost-plus-incentive-fee, aerospace, scientific-instrumentation, hubble-space-telescope, colorado, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $65.5 million to BAE SYSTEMS SPACE & MISSION SYSTEMS INC.. PORTIONS OF THE WIDE FIELD CAMERA 3 (WFC3)
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 $65.5 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2000-08-15. End: 2009-11-30.
What is the specific role and importance of the Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) within NASA's scientific mission?
The Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) is a crucial instrument aboard the Hubble Space Telescope, providing high-resolution imaging across a broad range of ultraviolet, visible, and near-infrared wavelengths. Its importance lies in its ability to capture detailed images of celestial objects, enabling astronomers to study galaxy formation, stellar evolution, exoplanet atmospheres, and the composition of the early universe. The data gathered by WFC3 has been instrumental in numerous scientific discoveries, contributing significantly to our understanding of cosmology and astrophysics. The contract awarded to BAE Systems was essential for the engineering and support services required to maintain and potentially enhance the WFC3's operational capabilities, ensuring its continued contribution to NASA's scientific objectives.
What are the typical justifications for awarding a contract on a sole-source basis, and how do they apply here?
Sole-source contract awards are typically justified when only one responsible source is available or capable of meeting the agency's needs. Common justifications include: unique capabilities or proprietary technology held by a single contractor, urgent and compelling needs where competition is not feasible, or when a previous contract for a system requires follow-on work that only the original contractor can perform due to compatibility or integration requirements. For the WFC3 contract, the justification likely stemmed from BAE Systems possessing specialized knowledge, proprietary data, or unique manufacturing/integration capabilities related to the camera system that made them the only viable option for the required engineering services. Without NASA's specific justification documentation, this remains an assumption, but it aligns with typical sole-source rationales in complex aerospace projects.
How does the Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract type influence cost control and contractor performance?
A Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract is designed to share the risks and rewards between the government and the contractor. The government agrees to pay the contractor's allowable costs plus a fee that is adjusted based on the contractor's performance against pre-determined targets, such as cost, schedule, or technical performance. In this case, if BAE Systems met or exceeded targets for the WFC3 engineering services, their fee would increase; conversely, failing to meet targets would reduce the fee. This structure incentivizes the contractor to control costs and achieve performance objectives. However, CPIF contracts can still lead to cost overruns if the targets are not set realistically or if the oversight is insufficient, as the government ultimately bears the majority of the cost risk.
What is the historical spending pattern for Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) related engineering services by NASA?
Analyzing historical spending patterns for specific instruments like the WFC3 requires access to detailed NASA procurement data over extended periods. This $65.5 million contract, awarded in 2000 and ending in 2009, represents a significant investment over its duration. Without broader data, it's difficult to establish a definitive trend. However, the long duration and sole-source nature suggest a sustained need for specialized support for this particular instrument. Future spending on similar instruments would likely depend on the development of new space telescopes and imaging technologies, and whether those require comparable levels of specialized engineering expertise. The trend in aerospace engineering services generally shows increasing complexity and cost due to technological advancements.
What are the potential risks associated with a long-duration, sole-source contract for specialized engineering services?
Long-duration, sole-source contracts carry several potential risks. Firstly, the lack of competition can lead to reduced price pressure, potentially resulting in higher costs for the government than if the contract were competed. Secondly, without the stimulus of competition, there might be less incentive for the contractor to innovate or improve efficiency over time. Thirdly, the agency can become overly reliant on a single contractor, creating a 'vendor lock-in' situation that makes switching providers difficult or costly. Finally, if the contractor's performance declines or their business circumstances change, the agency has limited immediate alternatives. For this WFC3 contract, NASA would need robust oversight to mitigate these risks and ensure continued value and performance.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT › Space R&D Services
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
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: $68,032,199
Exercised Options: $68,032,199
Current Obligation: $65,450,730
Timeline
Start Date: 2000-08-15
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 →