NASA awards $105M contract for GOES-R satellite sensor development and support through 2039

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $105,230,209 ($105.2M)

Contractor: THE Regents of the University of Colorado

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2007-08-23

End Date: 2039-06-25

Contract Duration: 11,629 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.0K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: TAS::80 0120::TAS THIS CONTRACT IS FOR THE TASKS NECESSARY TO DESIGN, ANALYZE, DEVELOP, FABRICATE, INTEGRATE, TEST, EVALUATE AND SUPPORT LAUNCH OF THE EUVS XRS IRRADIANCE SENSORS (EXIS), SUPPLY AND MAINTAIN THE INSTRUMENT GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT (GSE), AND SUPPORT THE SATELLITE OPERATIONS CONTROL CENTER (SOCC). THE EXIS IS CLASSIFIED AS A NON-PRIMARY INSTRUMENT SUITE ON THE GOES-R SATELLITE AND HAS A RISK CLASSIFICATION OF B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE PERSONNEL, MATERIALS, FACILITIES AND OTHER RESOURCES TO DESIGN, DEVELOP, DELIVER AND SUPPORT UNDER THE BASIC CONTRACT: A) PARTS AND MATERIALS FOR 4 FLIGHT MODELS B) ONE EXIS FLIGHT MODEL (FM) C) THREE SETS OF THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM TEST EQUIPMENT (ESTE) D) TWO EXIS EMULATORS (EXISES) E) TWO FLIGHT SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTS (FSDES) F) ONE GROUND PROCESSING DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM (GPDS) G) SPARES FOR THE FOUR FMS H) ALL ADDITIONAL EXIS MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT (MGSE AND EGSE) CALLED OUT ELSEWHERE IN THIS DOCUMENT I) ALL ITEMS AND DOCUMENTS SPECIFIED IN ALL CONTRACT DOCUMENTS THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE PERSONNEL, MATERIALS, FACILITIES AND OTHER RESOURCES TO DESIGN, DEVELOP, DELIVER AND SUPPORT: A) OPTION 1 FOR AN ADDITIONAL FLIGHT MODEL (FM-2) B) OPTION 2 FOR AN ADDITIONAL FLIGHT MODEL (FM-3) C) OPTION 3FOR AN ADDITIONAL FLIGHT MODEL (FM-3)

Place of Performance

Location: BOULDER, BOULDER County, COLORADO, 80303

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $105.2 million to THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO for work described as: TAS::80 0120::TAS THIS CONTRACT IS FOR THE TASKS NECESSARY TO DESIGN, ANALYZE, DEVELOP, FABRICATE, INTEGRATE, TEST, EVALUATE AND SUPPORT LAUNCH OF THE EUVS XRS IRRADIANCE SENSORS (EXIS), SUPPLY AND MAINTAIN THE INSTRUMENT GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT (GSE), AND SUPPORT THE SATELLITE … Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical EUVS XRS Irradiance Sensors (EXIS) for GOES-R satellite. 2. Long-term support and maintenance included, extending through June 2039. 3. Risk classification of 'B' indicates moderate risk for the EXIS instrument suite. 4. Includes fabrication of multiple flight models and associated test equipment. 5. Contractor will provide personnel, materials, and facilities for development and support. 6. Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type suggests potential for cost overruns. 7. Significant duration of over 11,000 days highlights long-term program commitment.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $105.2 million for the design, development, and support of the EUVS XRS Irradiance Sensors (EXIS) appears substantial given the scope. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure warrants close monitoring for cost efficiency. Benchmarking against similar satellite instrument development contracts would be necessary for a definitive value assessment, but the long duration and complexity suggest a significant investment. The inclusion of ground support equipment and satellite operations control center support adds to the overall value proposition.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This approach is often used when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities, intellectual property, or has been involved in the program from its inception, making competition impractical or detrimental to program continuity. The lack of competition means that price discovery through market forces was not utilized, potentially leading to higher costs than if multiple bids were solicited.

Taxpayer Impact: For taxpayers, a sole-source award means that the government did not leverage competitive bidding to secure the best possible price. This can result in a higher expenditure for the services rendered compared to a competed contract.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are NASA and the scientific community, who will utilize the data from the GOES-R satellite for weather forecasting and space weather monitoring. Services delivered include the design, analysis, development, fabrication, integration, testing, and support of the EXIS instrument suite. Geographic impact is global, as GOES-R satellites provide continuous monitoring of weather and environmental conditions across North America and surrounding regions. Workforce implications include employment for engineers, scientists, technicians, and support staff involved in the development and operation of the EXIS instrument.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Sole-source award limits price competition, potentially increasing costs for taxpayers.
  • Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type can incentivize cost overruns if not managed stringently.
  • Long contract duration (over 30 years) increases exposure to potential scope creep and evolving technological requirements.
  • Risk classification of 'B' for the instrument suggests potential technical challenges during development and operation.
  • Lack of explicit small business subcontracting goals in the provided data could limit opportunities for smaller firms.

Positive Signals

  • Contract ensures continuity of critical sensor development and support for a vital national asset (GOES-R).
  • The contractor, The Regents of the University of Colorado, has a direct role in the development, suggesting specialized expertise.
  • Long-term nature of the contract provides stability for program execution and personnel retention.
  • Inclusion of ground support and satellite operations support indicates a comprehensive approach to instrument lifecycle management.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on satellite instrumentation and space-based observation systems. The market for such specialized components is typically dominated by a few highly capable firms due to the stringent technical requirements and high barriers to entry. NASA's GOES-R program represents a significant investment in Earth observation technology, and this contract is a key component of that larger initiative. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other major satellite instrument development contracts, which often run into tens or hundreds of millions of dollars.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (sb) is false and that the contract is not a small business set-aside (ss is false). This suggests that the primary contractor is likely a large entity, and there are no explicit requirements for subcontracting to small businesses mandated within the basic contract terms as presented. The impact on the small business ecosystem is therefore minimal in terms of direct set-aside opportunities, though the prime contractor may engage small businesses as subcontractors at their discretion.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under NASA's program management and contracting offices. Given the long duration and complexity, regular performance reviews, milestone tracking, and financial audits would be expected. The Inspector General's office for NASA would have jurisdiction to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse. Transparency would be facilitated through NASA's public reporting mechanisms for its major programs, though specific contract details might be sensitive.

Related Government Programs

  • GOES-R Series Satellite Program
  • Space-Based Weather Monitoring Systems
  • Satellite Instrument Development
  • Aerospace Engineering Services
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Programs (as GOES data is used by NOAA)

Risk Flags

  • Sole-source award may limit cost savings.
  • Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract requires diligent oversight to manage costs.
  • Long contract duration increases risk of scope creep and obsolescence.
  • Moderate risk classification ('B') for instrument requires careful technical management.

Tags

nasa, space-exploration, satellite-development, instrumentation, engineering-services, sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee, long-term-contract, weather-monitoring, colorado, definitive-contract, risk-classification-b

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $105.2 million to THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO. TAS::80 0120::TAS THIS CONTRACT IS FOR THE TASKS NECESSARY TO DESIGN, ANALYZE, DEVELOP, FABRICATE, INTEGRATE, TEST, EVALUATE AND SUPPORT LAUNCH OF THE EUVS XRS IRRADIANCE SENSORS (EXIS), SUPPLY AND MAINTAIN THE INSTRUMENT GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT (GSE), AND SUPPORT THE SATELLITE OPERATIONS CONTROL CENTER (SOCC). THE EXIS IS CLASSIFIED AS A NON-PRIMARY INSTRUMENT SUITE ON THE GOES-R SATELLITE AND HAS A RISK CLASSIFICATION OF B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE PERSONNEL, MATERIALS, FACILITIES A

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO.

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 $105.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-08-23. End: 2039-06-25.

What is the track record of The Regents of the University of Colorado in performing similar large-scale aerospace contracts for NASA?

The Regents of the University of Colorado, through its research and development arms, has a history of involvement in space science and instrument development. While specific details of past NASA contracts are not provided here, universities often collaborate with government agencies on research-intensive projects. Their role as a sole-source provider for the EXIS instrument suggests a deep, established expertise and a prior relationship with NASA on this specific program or related technologies. Further investigation into their contract history with NASA, particularly for flight hardware development and integration, would be necessary to fully assess their track record on comparable projects.

How does the cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contract type compare to other pricing arrangements for satellite instrument development in terms of value for money?

Cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contracts are common in research and development where the scope or cost is uncertain at the outset. For the government, this structure offers flexibility but carries the risk of cost overruns, as the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a fixed fee. Compared to fixed-price contracts, CPFF can be less advantageous for taxpayers if costs escalate significantly, as the government bears the primary financial risk. However, for highly complex, innovative projects like satellite instruments where requirements may evolve, CPFF can facilitate necessary adjustments and ensure the contractor is incentivized to complete the work without being unduly penalized by unforeseen technical hurdles. Value for money is thus highly dependent on robust government oversight and cost control measures.

What are the primary risks associated with the 'B' risk classification for the EXIS instrument, and how are they being mitigated?

A 'B' risk classification for the EUVS XRS Irradiance Sensors (EXIS) typically indicates a moderate level of technical or programmatic risk. This could stem from factors such as the use of new or unproven technologies, complex integration requirements, or potential challenges in meeting stringent performance specifications. Mitigation strategies would likely involve rigorous testing protocols at various stages of development (e.g., component, subsystem, system levels), detailed design reviews, redundancy in critical components where feasible, and close collaboration between the contractor and NASA's engineering teams. The long contract duration also allows for iterative development and problem-solving, which can help manage and reduce identified risks over time.

What is the historical spending pattern for the GOES-R satellite program, and how does this contract fit into the overall budget?

The GOES-R Series Satellite Program is a multi-billion dollar initiative by NOAA and NASA to develop and launch a new generation of geostationary weather satellites. This contract, valued at approximately $105 million, represents a significant but specific portion of the overall program budget, likely focused on the development and production of the EXIS instrument suite. Historical spending on the GOES-R program has been allocated across various phases, including satellite bus development, instrument procurement, launch services, and ground system upgrades. This $105 million award fits within the broader funding allocated for instrument development and integration, contributing to the overall cost of the GOES-R mission.

Given the sole-source nature, what mechanisms are in place to ensure the contractor remains accountable for performance and delivery timelines?

Despite the sole-source award, accountability is typically ensured through robust contract management and oversight by the procuring agency (NASA). This includes establishing clear performance metrics, delivery schedules, and quality standards within the contract. Regular progress reviews, milestone payments tied to successful completion of specific deliverables, and potential penalties for non-performance or delays are common mechanisms. NASA's contracting officers are responsible for monitoring the contractor's adherence to these terms. Furthermore, the contract's cost-plus-fixed-fee structure, while reimbursing costs, still requires the contractor to meet the defined scope and objectives to earn their fixed fee, providing a financial incentive for accountability.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesArchitectural, Engineering, and Related ServicesEngineering Services

Product/Service Code: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTSpace R&D Services

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST NO FEE (S)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3100 MARINE ST RM 479, 572 UCB, BOULDER, CO, 80303

Business Categories: Category Business, Educational Institution, Higher Education, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $115,498,652

Exercised Options: $115,498,652

Current Obligation: $105,230,209

Actual Outlays: $12,516,242

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline

Start Date: 2007-08-23

Current End Date: 2039-06-25

Potential End Date: 2039-06-25 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2026-01-21

More Contracts from THE Regents of the University of Colorado

View all THE Regents of the University of Colorado federal contracts →

Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts

View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending