DOE's $13.7M contract for vitrification system improvements awarded to AtkinsRéalis Energy Federal EPC Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,713,019 ($13.7M)

Contractor: Atkinsrealis Energy Federal EPC Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Energy

Start Date: 2007-09-28

End Date: 2012-09-28

Contract Duration: 1,827 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.5K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Energy

Official Description: TEST AND EVALUATE HLW VITRIFICATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS

Place of Performance

Location: RICHLAND, BENTON County, WASHINGTON, 99352, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Washington Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Energy obligated $13.7 million to ATKINSREALIS ENERGY FEDERAL EPC INC. for work described as: TEST AND EVALUATE HLW VITRIFICATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, indicating a defined scope and cost. 2. The contract was not competed, raising questions about potential price discovery. 3. Performance period spanned five years, suggesting a medium-term project. 4. The contract value is moderate within the context of large federal engineering projects. 5. The primary contractor has a significant presence in federal energy sector contracts. 6. The project focused on critical nuclear waste processing technology.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $13.7 million for engineering services over five years appears moderate. Without specific benchmarks for vitrification system improvements, a direct value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the lack of competition suggests potential for higher-than-market pricing. Comparing this to similar DOE projects for waste management technology upgrades would provide better context.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not open to competitive bidding. This approach is typically used when only one contractor possesses the necessary specialized skills, technology, or is deemed essential for project continuity. The lack of competition limits the government's ability to solicit multiple proposals and potentially secure more favorable pricing through a bidding process.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can lead to higher costs for taxpayers as the government does not benefit from the price pressures inherent in a competitive bidding environment.

Public Impact

The Department of Energy benefits from the improved vitrification system, crucial for nuclear waste management. This contract supports the safe and efficient processing of high-level radioactive waste. The project's impact is primarily within the nuclear energy and environmental remediation sectors. Workforce implications include specialized engineering and technical roles required for system design and implementation.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may have resulted in a higher price than a competed contract.
Sole-source awards can reduce transparency in government contracting.
Potential for contractor lock-in due to specialized nature of the work.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Contract awarded to a known entity with experience in the energy sector.
Project addresses a critical national need for nuclear waste management.

Sector Analysis

The Department of Energy's mission includes managing the nation's nuclear legacy. Contracts for improving waste treatment technologies, such as vitrification systems, are critical within the broader energy and environmental services sector. This contract fits within the specialized niche of nuclear waste processing and engineering services, a market characterized by high technical barriers to entry and significant regulatory oversight. Comparable spending in this area often involves large capital investments for infrastructure upgrades and specialized equipment.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not competed and there is no indication of small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal. Large sole-source contracts often bypass opportunities for small businesses to participate as prime contractors or even significant subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would fall under the Department of Energy's internal procurement and project management structures. Given the nature of the work, it is likely subject to rigorous technical reviews and safety inspections. Transparency may be limited due to the sole-source award, but contract performance data and financial expenditures would typically be reported through federal procurement databases. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Energy Nuclear Waste Management Programs
High-Level Waste Vitrification Projects
Federal Engineering and Technical Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing.
Lack of transparency in procurement process.
Potential for cost overruns if scope is not well-defined.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical technology.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Energy awarded $13.7 million to ATKINSREALIS ENERGY FEDERAL EPC INC.. TEST AND EVALUATE HLW VITRIFICATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ATKINSREALIS ENERGY FEDERAL EPC INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Department of Energy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $13.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-09-28. End: 2012-09-28.

What is the track record of AtkinsRéalis Energy Federal EPC Inc. with the Department of Energy?

AtkinsRéalis Energy Federal EPC Inc. (formerly URS Federal Services) has a substantial history of working with the Department of Energy and other federal agencies on large-scale engineering and construction projects, particularly within the energy and environmental sectors. Their portfolio includes significant work on nuclear facilities, waste management, and infrastructure modernization. This extensive experience suggests a deep understanding of DOE's operational requirements, safety protocols, and regulatory landscape. While specific performance metrics for individual contracts are not always publicly detailed, their continued selection for complex projects indicates a generally satisfactory performance history with the agency, though specific contract outcomes and value-for-money assessments would require deeper dives into individual award data.

How does the $13.7 million contract value compare to similar vitrification system improvement projects?

Benchmarking the $13.7 million contract value for vitrification system improvements is challenging without access to detailed cost breakdowns and specific project scopes for comparable contracts. However, projects involving nuclear waste processing and the enhancement of highly specialized systems like vitrification often involve significant engineering, safety, and regulatory compliance costs. The five-year duration suggests a substantial undertaking. Generally, such specialized engineering services for critical infrastructure can range from millions to tens of millions of dollars, depending on the scale of the upgrade, the complexity of the technology, and the specific facility's requirements. The lack of competition for this specific award makes direct price comparison difficult, as competitive bids often drive down costs.

What are the primary risks associated with this sole-source contract?

The primary risks associated with this sole-source contract stem from the lack of competition. This can lead to a higher-than-market price for the services rendered, as the government did not benefit from the price discovery mechanisms of a competitive bidding process. There's also a risk of reduced innovation, as the contractor may have less incentive to propose cost-saving or efficiency-enhancing solutions compared to a competitive scenario. Furthermore, sole-source awards can sometimes indicate a lack of available qualified vendors or a reliance on a single provider, potentially creating a dependency and limiting future options. Ensuring robust oversight and performance management becomes crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure the government receives fair value.

How effective is the Department of Energy in managing contracts for critical nuclear infrastructure?

The Department of Energy has a complex and often challenging mandate regarding the management of contracts for critical nuclear infrastructure, including waste processing systems. Historically, DOE has faced scrutiny over cost overruns and schedule delays on major projects. However, the agency has also successfully executed numerous large-scale, technically demanding projects essential for national security and environmental cleanup. Their effectiveness often depends on the specific program, the complexity of the technology, the level of competition, and the robustness of their internal oversight and project management capabilities. For specialized areas like vitrification, where technical expertise is concentrated, sole-source or limited competition awards may be necessary, placing a greater emphasis on stringent contract management and performance monitoring.

What are the historical spending patterns for vitrification system improvements at DOE?

Historical spending patterns for vitrification system improvements at the Department of Energy are not easily aggregated into a single, easily comparable figure due to the specialized and often project-specific nature of these upgrades. DOE's spending in this area is typically embedded within broader nuclear waste management programs, facility modernization efforts, or specific site cleanup initiatives. Contracts for vitrification technology development, system upgrades, or new plant construction can vary significantly in value, ranging from millions for specific component improvements to hundreds of millions or even billions for entirely new processing facilities. The $13.7 million awarded here represents a specific investment in system enhancements rather than a new facility construction, fitting within the typical expenditure range for targeted technological improvements.

What are the implications of the firm-fixed-price contract type for this project?

A firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type, as used in this award, offers significant advantages for the Department of Energy by providing cost certainty. Under an FFP contract, the contractor agrees to a set price for the work, and the government's liability is limited to that amount, barring any contract modifications. This structure shifts the risk of cost overruns from the government to the contractor. For a project involving engineering services for system improvements, an FFP contract incentivizes the contractor to manage their costs efficiently and complete the work within the agreed-upon budget. This is particularly beneficial for projects where the scope of work can be clearly defined upfront, reducing the potential for unexpected financial liabilities for the taxpayer.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Energy Solutions Performance Strategies Inc. (UEI: 078891647)

Address: 2345 STEVENS DR STE 240, RICHLAND, WA, 99354

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $13,713,019

Exercised Options: $13,713,019

Current Obligation: $13,713,019

Timeline