NIH awards $4.97M UESC for energy conservation at animal center, extending through 2036

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $4,972,217 ($5.0M)

Contractor: THE Potomac Edison CO

Awarding Agency: Department of Health and Human Services

Start Date: 2021-05-03

End Date: 2036-05-01

Contract Duration: 5,477 days

Daily Burn Rate: $908/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: UTILITY ENERGY SERVICES CONTRACT (UESC) ENERGY CONSERVATION PROJECT WITH POTOMAC EDISON FOR BUILDINGS 101A, 102, 103, 104, 107, 110,111, 115, GARAGE, FIVE (5) SPECIALTY BUILDINGS AND STREETLIGHTS. LOCATED ON THE NIH ANIMAL CENTER CAMPUS, 16701 ELMER

Place of Performance

Location: DICKERSON, MONTGOMERY County, MARYLAND, 20842

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Health and Human Services obligated $5.0 million to THE POTOMAC EDISON CO for work described as: UTILITY ENERGY SERVICES CONTRACT (UESC) ENERGY CONSERVATION PROJECT WITH POTOMAC EDISON FOR BUILDINGS 101A, 102, 103, 104, 107, 110,111, 115, GARAGE, FIVE (5) SPECIALTY BUILDINGS AND STREETLIGHTS. LOCATED ON THE NIH ANIMAL CENTER CAMPUS, 16701 ELMER Key points: 1. The contract focuses on energy conservation measures, aiming for long-term utility cost savings. 2. A long performance period suggests a strategic investment in infrastructure modernization. 3. The sole-source award raises questions about potential cost efficiencies compared to a competitive process. 4. Performance is tied to a specific campus location, limiting broad applicability. 5. The contract type is firm fixed price, providing cost certainty for the government. 6. The project involves multiple buildings and streetlights, indicating a comprehensive approach to energy management.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $4.97 million for an energy conservation project over 15 years appears reasonable for a large campus. However, without specific details on the energy savings expected or the scope of work, a direct comparison to similar contracts is difficult. The firm fixed-price nature provides budget predictability, but it's crucial to ensure the project delivers the anticipated energy efficiency improvements to validate the value for money.

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. Potomac Edison is the incumbent utility provider for the NIH Animal Center campus. While sole-source awards can be efficient for specific needs, they limit the opportunity for market competition, which could potentially drive down prices or encourage innovative solutions from a wider range of vendors.

Taxpayer Impact: A sole-source award means taxpayers did not benefit from competitive bidding, which could have resulted in a lower price or better terms.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the National Institutes of Health (NIH) through reduced energy costs and improved facility efficiency at their Animal Center. The services delivered include energy conservation measures for buildings and streetlights, contributing to sustainability goals. The geographic impact is localized to the NIH Animal Center campus in Maryland. Workforce implications are likely minimal, primarily involving the contractor's personnel for project implementation and maintenance.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may lead to higher costs than a fully competed contract.
Long contract duration could present risks if technology or energy needs change significantly.
Scope of work details are not fully elaborated, potentially leading to scope creep or unmet needs.

Positive Signals

Focus on energy conservation aligns with federal sustainability initiatives.
Firm fixed price provides cost certainty for the duration of the contract.
Long-term contract allows for sustained energy efficiency improvements and potential long-term cost savings.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Utility Energy Services Contract (UESC) category, a program designed to help federal agencies reduce energy costs and improve energy efficiency. UESCs are typically awarded to local utility companies. The market for energy services is competitive, but UESCs often leverage existing utility relationships. The total federal spending on energy services is substantial, with UESCs representing a significant portion aimed at infrastructure modernization and operational efficiency.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract includes small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. As a sole-source award to a utility provider, the focus is likely on the direct delivery of services by the awarded contractor rather than engaging a broad network of small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically reside with the contracting officer and program managers at the National Institutes of Health. The firm fixed-price nature simplifies financial oversight, but performance monitoring to ensure energy savings are realized is crucial. Transparency is moderate, as the award details are public, but the specifics of the energy conservation measures and their projected savings may not be readily available to the public.

Related Government Programs

Utility Energy Services Contracts (UESCs)
Energy Conservation Projects
Federal Building Modernization
Department of Health and Human Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing.
Long contract duration may not adapt to future technological changes.
Lack of detailed scope and savings projections hinders value assessment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Health and Human Services awarded $5.0 million to THE POTOMAC EDISON CO. UTILITY ENERGY SERVICES CONTRACT (UESC) ENERGY CONSERVATION PROJECT WITH POTOMAC EDISON FOR BUILDINGS 101A, 102, 103, 104, 107, 110,111, 115, GARAGE, FIVE (5) SPECIALTY BUILDINGS AND STREETLIGHTS. LOCATED ON THE NIH ANIMAL CENTER CAMPUS, 16701 ELMER

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE POTOMAC EDISON CO.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Health and Human Services (National Institutes of Health).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $5.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-05-03. End: 2036-05-01.

What specific energy conservation measures are included in this UESC, and what are the projected energy savings?

The provided data does not detail the specific energy conservation measures (ECMs) to be implemented under this UESC. Typically, UESCs can include a wide range of upgrades such as lighting retrofits, HVAC system improvements, building envelope enhancements, and renewable energy installations. The projected energy savings are also not specified in the available data. For a comprehensive analysis, it would be necessary to review the contract's statement of work and any associated energy savings calculations or guarantees. Without this information, it is difficult to fully assess the potential return on investment and the overall value proposition of the contract beyond the initial investment amount.

How does the $4.97 million contract value compare to similar UESC projects at other federal facilities?

Comparing the $4.97 million contract value requires context regarding the size and scope of the NIH Animal Center campus and the specific energy conservation measures planned. UESC projects can vary significantly in cost based on the number of buildings, their age and condition, the types of upgrades implemented, and the duration of the contract. For a large campus with multiple buildings and streetlights, $4.97 million over a 15-year performance period might be considered moderate. However, without detailed project scopes and energy savings projections for comparable facilities, a precise benchmark is challenging. Generally, UESCs aim for a payback period where energy savings offset the project costs within a defined timeframe, often 10-20 years.

What are the risks associated with a sole-source award for this energy conservation project?

The primary risk of a sole-source award is the potential for a higher price compared to a competitively procured contract, as the government does not benefit from the price pressures of multiple bidders. There's also a risk that the chosen contractor may not offer the most innovative or cost-effective solutions available in the market. Furthermore, without a competitive process, there's less incentive for the contractor to optimize performance and cost throughout the contract lifecycle. However, sole-source awards can be justified when there is a unique capability or necessity, such as leveraging an incumbent utility's infrastructure and expertise for a specific campus.

What is the track record of Potomac Edison in executing similar energy conservation projects for federal agencies?

Information regarding Potomac Edison's specific track record with federal UESC projects is not detailed in the provided data. As a utility company, Potomac Edison likely has experience with energy efficiency programs and infrastructure upgrades for its commercial and industrial customers. To assess their track record for federal contracts, one would need to examine past performance evaluations, contract history databases (like SAM.gov), and any publicly available case studies or testimonials related to their work with government entities. A thorough review would help determine their reliability, technical expertise, and success in delivering energy savings and project objectives.

How will the effectiveness of the energy conservation measures be measured and verified over the contract's 15-year duration?

The effectiveness of energy conservation measures is typically measured and verified through a Measurement and Verification (M&V) plan, often stipulated in the contract. This plan outlines the methodologies for tracking energy consumption before and after the implementation of upgrades, accounting for variables like weather and building occupancy. For a 15-year contract, periodic M&V would be essential to ensure that the projected savings are being realized and that the installed systems are performing as expected. The contract should specify who is responsible for M&V, the frequency of reporting, and the criteria for success. Without a defined M&V process, it's difficult to confirm the long-term value and impact of the project.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Utilities › Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution › Other Electric Power Generation

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › UTILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Firstenergy Corp.

Address: 10802 BOWER AVENUE, WILLIAMSPORT, MD, 21795

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $24,904,880

Exercised Options: $4,972,217

Current Obligation: $4,972,217

Actual Outlays: $4,628,558

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47PA0418D0035

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline