DOE's $3.56B Hanford cleanup support contract awarded to Mission Support Alliance, LLC
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $3,557,405,197 ($3.6B)
Contractor: Mission Support Alliance, LLC
Awarding Agency: Department of Energy
Start Date: 2009-04-28
End Date: 2021-01-24
Contract Duration: 4,289 days
Daily Burn Rate: $829.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: MISSION SUPPORT CONTRACT - PROVIDE DIRECT SUPPORT TO DOE-RL, DOE-ORP AND THEIR CONTRACTORS WITH COST-EFFECTIVE INFRASTRUCTURE AND SITE SERVICES INTEGRAL AND NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH THE HANFORD SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP MISSION.
Place of Performance
Location: RICHLAND, BENTON County, WASHINGTON, 99354
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Energy obligated $3.56 billion to MISSION SUPPORT ALLIANCE, LLC for work described as: MISSION SUPPORT CONTRACT - PROVIDE DIRECT SUPPORT TO DOE-RL, DOE-ORP AND THEIR CONTRACTORS WITH COST-EFFECTIVE INFRASTRUCTURE AND SITE SERVICES INTEGRAL AND NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH THE HANFORD SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP MISSION. Key points: 1. Contract provides essential infrastructure and site services for the Hanford Site environmental cleanup mission. 2. The contract's duration spans over 11 years, indicating a long-term commitment to the cleanup effort. 3. Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust selection process. 4. The cost-plus-award-fee structure incentivizes performance and cost efficiency. 5. The contract's value places it among significant federal investments in environmental remediation. 6. Services are integral to achieving the critical environmental cleanup objectives at Hanford.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The total contract value of $3.56 billion over approximately 11 years suggests a substantial investment in environmental cleanup. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale environmental remediation contracts is complex due to the unique nature of the Hanford site. However, the cost-plus-award-fee (CPAF) pricing structure, with a base fee and potential award fee, aims to balance cost control with performance incentives. The base contract value and the significant award fee potential indicate a focus on achieving specific cleanup milestones and operational efficiencies. The reported base value of $829,425 appears to be an initial or partial amount, with the total obligated amount reflecting the full scope over the contract's life.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that multiple qualified bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. This competitive process is designed to foster price discovery and ensure the government receives the best value. The fact that it was competed openly suggests that the government sought a wide range of solutions and pricing structures to meet the complex needs of the Hanford Site cleanup. The number of bidders is not specified, but the open competition itself is a positive indicator for cost-effectiveness.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally leads to more competitive pricing, which benefits taxpayers by ensuring that federal funds are used efficiently for essential services like environmental cleanup.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Energy (DOE) and its various programs at the Hanford Site, enabling them to execute their environmental cleanup mission. Services delivered include infrastructure maintenance, site operations, and other support functions critical for the cleanup. The geographic impact is concentrated at the Hanford Site in Washington State, a critical location for nuclear waste management and remediation. Workforce implications include the employment of numerous personnel involved in site operations, maintenance, and specialized cleanup support roles.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Long contract duration (over 11 years) could lead to potential complacency or reduced agility if not actively managed.
- Cost-plus-award-fee contracts can sometimes lead to cost overruns if award fee criteria are not strictly defined and monitored.
- The sheer scale of the contract and the complexity of the Hanford cleanup present inherent risks of unforeseen challenges and cost increases.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process that should drive value.
- The cost-plus-award-fee structure incentivizes contractor performance and efficiency in achieving cleanup goals.
- The contract directly supports a critical national environmental cleanup mission, indicating high strategic importance.
- Long-term nature of the contract provides stability for essential services required for ongoing cleanup operations.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, which is a broad category encompassing a wide range of services necessary for the operation and maintenance of government facilities. The Hanford Site cleanup is a massive, multi-decade undertaking, representing one of the largest environmental remediation projects in the world. Spending in this sector is often driven by government needs for infrastructure management, operational support, and specialized services. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within large-scale environmental services contracts awarded by agencies like the DOE, EPA, or DOD for complex site remediation and management.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a large-scale, comprehensive support services contract for a major federal site, it is likely that the prime contractor, Mission Support Alliance, LLC, would engage in subcontracting to fulfill various specialized requirements. The extent of small business subcontracting would depend on the specific needs of the Hanford cleanup mission and the company's subcontracting plan. Without specific subcontracting data, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem, though large prime contracts often create opportunities for small businesses as subcontractors.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Energy's program offices responsible for the Hanford Site cleanup. The contract's cost-plus-award-fee structure necessitates robust performance monitoring and evaluation to determine award fee payouts. Transparency is generally maintained through federal contract databases and agency reporting. Inspector General jurisdiction would likely fall under the DOE Office of Inspector General, which investigates fraud, waste, and abuse in DOE programs and contracts.
Related Government Programs
- Hanford Site Cleanup
- Environmental Remediation Services
- Department of Energy Infrastructure Support
- Nuclear Site Operations
- Federal Facilities Maintenance
Risk Flags
- Long-term contract duration requires sustained oversight.
- Cost-plus-award-fee structure necessitates rigorous performance monitoring.
- Complexity of Hanford cleanup presents inherent risks.
- Potential for cost overruns due to unforeseen site conditions.
Tags
facilities-support-services, environmental-cleanup, department-of-energy, hanford-site, washington, definitive-contract, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, mission-support, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Energy awarded $3.56 billion to MISSION SUPPORT ALLIANCE, LLC. MISSION SUPPORT CONTRACT - PROVIDE DIRECT SUPPORT TO DOE-RL, DOE-ORP AND THEIR CONTRACTORS WITH COST-EFFECTIVE INFRASTRUCTURE AND SITE SERVICES INTEGRAL AND NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH THE HANFORD SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP MISSION.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is MISSION SUPPORT ALLIANCE, LLC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Department of Energy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $3.56 billion.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-04-28. End: 2021-01-24.
What is the historical spending trend for this specific contract since its inception?
The contract, awarded on April 28, 2009, and ending on January 24, 2021, represents a significant, long-term investment. The total obligated amount of $3,557,405,197.21 indicates substantial annual spending. While specific year-over-year spending data is not provided in this summary, the contract's duration and total value suggest a consistent and high level of expenditure throughout its life. The cost-plus-award-fee (CPAF) structure implies that spending would fluctuate based on performance and the achievement of award fee criteria, alongside the base operational costs. Analyzing detailed financial reports or contract spending profiles would be necessary to discern precise historical spending patterns and identify any significant deviations or trends.
How does the awarded amount compare to the initial estimated cost or budget for the Hanford cleanup mission?
The awarded amount of $3.56 billion represents the total value of the contract over its lifespan, covering essential infrastructure and site services integral to the Hanford Site environmental cleanup mission. It is difficult to directly compare this to an initial 'estimated cost' for the entire mission without more context, as the mission itself is vast and multi-faceted, involving numerous contracts and phases. This specific contract focuses on 'Mission Support,' providing the foundational services required for other cleanup activities to occur. The value reflects the scale and complexity of maintaining and operating a site of Hanford's magnitude for over a decade. The Department of Energy's budget justifications and Hanford-specific program plans would contain more detailed information on how this contract's value aligns with broader budgetary allocations for the cleanup.
What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to determine the award fee for Mission Support Alliance, LLC?
While the specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for determining the award fee are not detailed in the provided data, Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) contracts typically tie award fees to the contractor's performance against pre-defined metrics. For a mission support contract at the Hanford Site, these KPIs would likely encompass a range of operational and service delivery aspects. Examples could include: timely and effective maintenance of critical infrastructure (e.g., utilities, roads, buildings), adherence to safety protocols and incident reduction, efficiency in resource management (e.g., energy, water), successful execution of site services (e.g., waste handling support, security), environmental compliance, and responsiveness to DOE directives. The DOE would establish specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals for these areas, and the contractor's achievement against these goals would inform the award fee determination.
What is the track record of Mission Support Alliance, LLC in managing similar large-scale federal contracts?
Mission Support Alliance, LLC was specifically formed to manage this significant contract at the Hanford Site. As a joint venture, its members likely bring individual expertise in relevant fields such as infrastructure management, environmental services, and project management. The formation of a dedicated entity for this contract suggests a tailored approach to meet the unique demands of the Hanford cleanup. While specific details on the track record of the LLC itself prior to this contract are limited, the award through full and open competition implies that the bidding entity (or its constituent members) demonstrated the necessary capabilities and experience to undertake such a large and complex federal undertaking. Evaluating the performance history of the individual member companies within their respective domains would provide further insight into their collective capabilities.
Are there any significant risks or challenges associated with this contract that have been identified by oversight bodies?
Given the scale and complexity of the Hanford Site's environmental cleanup mission, significant risks and challenges are inherent. Oversight bodies, such as the Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General (DOE OIG) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO), regularly scrutinize large federal contracts. Potential risks associated with this mission support contract could include cost overruns due to unforeseen site conditions or technical challenges, schedule delays impacting the overall cleanup timeline, safety incidents, environmental compliance issues, and contractor performance deficiencies. The DOE OIG, in particular, would be tasked with identifying and reporting on such risks through audits and investigations. While specific reports on this contract are not detailed here, the nature of the work suggests that ongoing vigilance regarding safety, environmental protection, cost control, and schedule adherence is crucial.
What is the potential for cost savings or efficiencies that the 'award fee' component aims to achieve?
The 'award fee' component in a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) contract like this one is designed to incentivize the contractor to exceed baseline performance expectations and achieve specific cost-saving or efficiency goals. The contract structure typically includes a base fee (covering essential services) and an award fee pool, which the contractor can earn by meeting or exceeding pre-determined performance criteria. For this mission support contract, potential efficiencies could relate to optimizing utility consumption, streamlining maintenance operations, improving waste management processes, or implementing innovative solutions that reduce overall project costs or accelerate cleanup timelines. The 'award fee' acts as a performance-based bonus, motivating Mission Support Alliance, LLC to actively seek and implement cost-effective strategies beyond the minimum requirements, thereby benefiting the taxpayer by potentially lowering the total cost of the cleanup mission.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITY › OPERATE RESTORATION ACTIVITIES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: DEAC0607RL14728
Offers Received: 4
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Leidos Holdings, Inc.
Address: 2490 GARLICK BLVD, RICHLAND, WA, 99354
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $4,891,095,334
Exercised Options: $4,891,095,334
Current Obligation: $3,557,405,197
Actual Outlays: $381,955,601
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-04-28
Current End Date: 2021-01-24
Potential End Date: 2021-01-24 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2025-04-25
Other Department of Energy Contracts
- Federal Contract — $48.1B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- ,Ct::igf Contract Award De-Na0003525 to the National Technology&engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC (ntess) for the Management and Operation of the Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration's Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) — $41.7B (National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC)
- Management and Operation of the OAK Ridge National Laboratory — $40.8B (Ut-Battelle LLC)
- TAS::89 0240::TAS This Performance-Based Management Contract (pbmc) IS for the Management and Operation of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (llnl). the Contractor Shall, in Accordance With the Provisions of This Contract, Accomplish the Missions and Programs Assigned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Manage and Operate the Laboratory. the Laboratory IS ONE of Does Office of Defense Program Multi-Program Laboratories. the Laboratory IS a Federally Funded Research and Development Institution (established in Accordance With the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35 and Operated Under This Management and Operating (M&O) Contract, AS Defined in FAR 17.6 and Dear 917.6 — $40.8B (Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC)
- M&O of Lanl BR of U of CA — $35.3B (Regents of the University of California, the)