NASA's $37.9M Mechanical Systems Engineering Services II/B contract awarded to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $37,897,895 ($37.9M)
Contractor: KBR Wyle Services, LLC
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2007-02-01
End Date: 2012-01-31
Contract Duration: 1,825 days
Daily Burn Rate: $20.8K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: R&D
Official Description: MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES II/B
Place of Performance
Location: LANHAM, PRINCE GEORGES County, MARYLAND, 20706
State: Maryland Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $37.9 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC for work described as: MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES II/B Key points: 1. Contract awarded for mechanical systems engineering services, indicating a need for specialized technical expertise. 2. The contract duration of 1825 days suggests a long-term requirement for these services. 3. Awarded to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC, a contractor with a significant presence in government services. 4. The contract type (Cost Plus Award Fee) suggests performance incentives are tied to achieving specific objectives. 5. The procurement method indicates a competitive process, aiming for best value. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541710 points to research and development activities.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The total award amount of $37.9 million over five years for mechanical systems engineering services appears reasonable given the specialized nature of the work. Benchmarking against similar contracts for R&D in engineering services is challenging without more specific task details. However, the Cost Plus Award Fee structure implies that the final cost could vary based on performance, potentially leading to better value if high performance is achieved. The contract was awarded to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC, a known entity in this space.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This 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 4 bidders suggests a moderate level of competition. This approach aims to balance broad market access with the need to potentially narrow down highly specialized capabilities.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive process, even with exclusions, generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging multiple firms to offer their best pricing and technical solutions to secure the award.
Public Impact
Benefits NASA's research and development efforts in mechanical systems engineering. Supports critical engineering functions for space exploration and related technological advancements. Likely impacts a workforce of specialized engineers and technical professionals. Geographic impact is primarily centered around NASA facilities, potentially in Maryland where the contract was noted.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns inherent in Cost Plus Award Fee contracts if performance targets are not met efficiently.
- The 'Exclusion of Sources' aspect of the competition warrants further understanding to ensure no qualified small businesses were unduly excluded.
Positive Signals
- The competitive nature of the award suggests that NASA sought the best technical and cost solutions available.
- The long contract duration indicates a stable and ongoing need for these critical engineering services.
- Awarding to an established contractor like KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC may imply a track record of successful performance on similar contracts.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Research and Development sector, specifically focusing on physical, engineering, and life sciences. The market for specialized engineering services supporting government agencies, particularly in aerospace and defense, is substantial. Contracts like this are crucial for maintaining technological superiority and advancing scientific discovery. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within NASA's broader R&D budget and specific engineering support categories.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary impact on the small business ecosystem would be through potential subcontracting opportunities if KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC engages small businesses for specialized support. Without explicit subcontracting plans, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on small business growth.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by NASA's contracting officers and program managers. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure includes mechanisms for performance evaluation, which are key to oversight. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- NASA Research and Development Contracts
- Engineering Services Contracts
- Aerospace R&D Support
- Mechanical Systems Engineering
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns in CPAF contracts.
- Limited transparency on specific performance metrics and award fee determinations.
- Need for clarity on the justification for 'Exclusion of Sources'.
Tags
nasa, research-and-development, engineering-services, mechanical-systems, kbr-wyle-services, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, definitive-contract, maryland, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $37.9 million to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES II/B
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 $37.9 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2007-02-01. End: 2012-01-31.
What is the specific nature of the 'Mechanical Systems Engineering Services' provided under this contract?
The contract, 'MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES II/B', awarded to KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC by NASA, likely encompasses a broad range of specialized engineering support. This could include design, analysis, testing, integration, and maintenance of mechanical systems critical to NASA's missions. Given the R&D classification (NAICS 541710), services may involve developing new technologies, improving existing systems, and providing technical expertise for experimental projects. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) payment structure suggests that performance metrics and award fees are tied to achieving specific technical milestones, quality standards, and project objectives, indicating a focus on high-value, performance-driven outcomes rather than just labor hours.
How does the performance of KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC on this contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar R&D services?
Assessing KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC's performance against industry benchmarks for this specific contract requires access to detailed performance reports, award fee determinations, and potentially independent cost analyses, which are not publicly available. However, KBR WYLE SERVICES, LLC is a well-established government contractor with a significant portfolio of engineering and technical services. Their ability to secure a five-year, $37.9 million contract with NASA suggests a level of capability and past performance that meets NASA's stringent requirements. To benchmark effectively, one would compare their cost efficiency, adherence to schedule, technical innovation, and overall client satisfaction against other large prime contractors performing similar R&D engineering services for agencies like NASA, DoD, or DOE.
What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract of this magnitude?
The primary risks associated with a CPAF contract of this magnitude ($37.9 million) revolve around cost control and the potential for contractor inefficiency. While CPAF incentivizes performance through award fees, it also allows the contractor to recover allowable costs plus a fee that can be adjusted based on performance. This structure can lead to cost growth if performance targets are not clearly defined, measurable, or if NASA's oversight is insufficient. There's a risk that the contractor might prioritize achieving award fee criteria over strict cost discipline. Additionally, the complexity of mechanical systems engineering in an R&D context introduces technical risks, such as unforeseen challenges in design, testing, or integration, which could impact both cost and schedule.
What is the historical spending pattern for mechanical systems engineering services at NASA, and how does this contract fit in?
Historical spending patterns for mechanical systems engineering services at NASA would typically show a consistent need for such expertise, driven by the demands of complex space missions, research programs, and infrastructure development. NASA relies heavily on specialized engineering support across various disciplines, including mechanical systems. This $37.9 million contract, awarded over five years (2007-2012), represents a significant but likely proportional investment within NASA's broader R&D and operational budgets during that period. Analyzing historical data would reveal trends in contract values, durations, and the types of contractors frequently engaged. This specific contract fits within the agency's strategy to leverage external expertise for specialized technical functions, allowing NASA to focus its internal resources on core mission objectives.
What does the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' procurement method imply for value and innovation?
The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method implies that NASA initially intended to solicit offers from all responsible sources but subsequently excluded certain sources based on specific, justifiable reasons. This could be due to requirements for specialized security clearances, unique technical capabilities, or prior performance issues. While it aims for broad competition, the exclusion means the pool of potential offerors is smaller than true full and open competition. This could potentially limit the range of innovative approaches or price points. However, if the exclusions were narrowly tailored and justified, it could ensure that only highly qualified and relevant bidders participate, potentially leading to better technical solutions and value, albeit from a reduced set of competitors.
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: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 4
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: $200,000,000
Exercised Options: $200,000,000
Current Obligation: $37,897,895
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Timeline
Start Date: 2007-02-01
Current End Date: 2012-01-31
Potential End Date: 2012-01-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2023-01-25
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)
- 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 →