DOE awards $10.7M for environmental impact statement preparation, with 2 bids received

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,731,700 ($10.7M)

Contractor: Jason Associates Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Energy

Start Date: 2006-07-06

End Date: 2010-08-05

Contract Duration: 1,491 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.2K/day

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS INCENTIVE

Sector: Other

Official Description: PREPARATION AND REVIEW OF A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS

Place of Performance

Location: LAS VEGAS, CLARK County, NEVADA, 89134

State: Nevada Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Energy obligated $10.7 million to JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION for work described as: PREPARATION AND REVIEW OF A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the scope of environmental review required. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a limited but potentially adequate bidding environment. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, primarily related to project scope and timeline adherence. 4. Performance context is within the typical range for complex environmental assessments. 5. Sector positioning is within engineering and environmental consulting services for government projects.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $10.7 million for preparing a supplemental environmental impact statement and related documents is within a reasonable range for such complex analyses. While direct comparisons are difficult without specific project details, similar large-scale environmental reviews for federal projects can range from several million to tens of millions of dollars. The cost-plus-incentive fee structure suggests an attempt to manage costs while incentivizing performance, but the ultimate value will depend on the efficiency and effectiveness of the contractor's work and the final scope of the environmental documents.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was competed with two bids received, indicating a limited competition. While two bidders are better than one, it raises questions about the extent of market engagement and whether a broader competition could have yielded more competitive pricing or innovative solutions. The limited number of bidders might be due to the specialized nature of environmental impact statement preparation or specific requirements of the Department of Energy.

Taxpayer Impact: A limited competition means taxpayers may not have benefited from the most aggressive pricing that a wider field of bidders could have offered. This could potentially lead to higher costs than if the contract had been more widely advertised and competed.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Energy and potentially the public, through a more thorough understanding of the environmental impacts of proposed actions. The services delivered include the preparation of critical environmental documentation required by federal law. The geographic impact is likely focused on the specific site or region where the environmental review is being conducted. Workforce implications include employment for environmental scientists, engineers, and technical writers involved in the preparation of these documents.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to the 'cost-plus' nature of the contract if not closely managed.
Risk of delays in the environmental review process impacting project timelines.
Ensuring the quality and comprehensiveness of the environmental impact statement is crucial for regulatory compliance.

Positive Signals

The contract is for a critical environmental compliance function, ensuring regulatory adherence.
The contractor, Jason Associates Corporation, has experience in this specialized field.
The incentive fee structure aims to align contractor performance with project goals.

Sector Analysis

The environmental consulting sector is a significant part of the broader professional services industry supporting government agencies. This contract falls within the engineering and environmental services sub-sector, which is characterized by specialized expertise and regulatory compliance requirements. The market size for federal environmental consulting services is substantial, driven by ongoing infrastructure projects, regulatory mandates, and agency operational needs. Comparable spending benchmarks for environmental impact statements vary widely based on project complexity, but multi-million dollar contracts are common for large federal endeavors.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract was specifically set aside for small businesses, nor is there information on subcontracting plans. Given the contract value and specialized nature, it is likely that larger firms or those with established expertise in environmental consulting were the primary participants. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses were involved as subcontractors or if there were opportunities missed for small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and program managers within the Department of Energy. Accountability measures are built into the cost-plus-incentive fee structure, which rewards performance and cost control. Transparency is generally maintained through federal contract databases, though the detailed internal workings of the environmental review process may not be fully public. The Inspector General's office for the Department of Energy would have jurisdiction over any potential fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance
Environmental Impact Assessments
Engineering Consulting Services
Department of Energy Environmental Programs

Risk Flags

Limited Competition
Cost-Plus Contract Type
Potential for Scope Creep

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Energy awarded $10.7 million to JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION. PREPARATION AND REVIEW OF A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is JASON ASSOCIATES CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-07-06. End: 2010-08-05.

What is the track record of Jason Associates Corporation in performing similar environmental impact statement services for the federal government?

Jason Associates Corporation has a history of providing engineering and environmental consulting services to federal agencies. While specific details on past environmental impact statement (EIS) projects require deeper database searches, their presence in this sector suggests experience. A review of their past performance on similar contracts, including client feedback, past performance evaluations, and any documented issues, would be necessary to fully assess their capability and reliability for this specific task. Understanding their success rate in meeting deadlines and budget constraints on comparable projects is crucial for evaluating their suitability.

How does the $10.7 million contract value compare to similar environmental impact statement preparations for Department of Energy projects?

Benchmarking the $10.7 million contract value requires comparing it against similar supplemental environmental impact statements (SEIS) prepared for Department of Energy (DOE) projects or comparable federal agencies. The complexity, scope, and duration of the environmental review are key factors. For instance, an SEIS for a major facility upgrade or a new energy project could easily cost several million dollars. Without knowing the specific project this SEIS supports, a precise comparison is difficult. However, for large-scale environmental analyses mandated by NEPA, this figure appears to be within a plausible range, suggesting fair market value, assuming the scope of work is substantial.

What are the primary risks associated with this cost-plus-incentive fee (CPIF) contract structure for the government?

The primary risks associated with a CPIF contract for the government revolve around cost control and contractor efficiency. While the incentive fee aims to motivate the contractor to perform well and manage costs, there's a risk that the 'cost-plus' component could lead to higher-than-expected expenditures if the contractor's cost accounting is not rigorously audited or if unforeseen issues drive up expenses. The government must ensure robust oversight to verify incurred costs and to accurately assess whether the contractor is meeting performance targets to earn their incentive fee. Inadequate oversight could result in paying more than necessary for the services rendered.

What is the typical duration and complexity of environmental impact statements that warrant a contract of this magnitude?

Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), and particularly Supplemental EIS (SEIS), that warrant contracts in the multi-million dollar range are typically associated with projects of significant scale and potential environmental consequence. This could include major energy infrastructure development (e.g., power plants, transmission lines), large-scale resource extraction, significant facility expansions or modifications at national laboratories, or complex regulatory actions. The duration can range from 18 months to several years, depending on the complexity of the issues, the number of alternatives analyzed, the extent of public and agency involvement, and the need for specialized scientific studies (e.g., ecological surveys, air quality modeling, cultural resource assessments).

How does the limited competition (2 bidders) potentially impact the government's ability to secure the best value for this environmental consulting service?

Limited competition, such as the two bidders in this case, generally increases the risk that the government may not achieve the best possible value. With fewer bidders, there is less pressure on each company to offer the most competitive pricing or the most innovative solutions. The government might not benefit from the full spectrum of market capabilities or the most aggressive cost proposals that a more robust competition could generate. While the government negotiates terms, the lack of strong competitive tension can lead to higher prices or less favorable contract terms than might be obtainable in a full and open competition.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: SPECIAL STUDIES/ANALYSIS, NOT R&D › SPECIAL STUDIES - NOT R and D

Contractor Details

Address: 3990 OLD TOWN AVE C102, SAN DIEGO, CA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $11,981,374

Exercised Options: $10,909,626

Current Obligation: $10,731,700

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DEAM0402AL67953

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline