Department of Energy's $152.5M NETL Site Operations Support contract awarded to US&S - E2 I, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $152,496,148 ($152.5M)

Contractor: US&S - E2 I, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Energy

Start Date: 2015-02-01

End Date: 2020-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,885 days

Daily Burn Rate: $80.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF DE-FE0023656 - SITE OPERATIONS SUPPORT (SOS) SERVICES FOR THE NATIONAL ENERGY TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY (NETL) SBA REQUIREMENT NO. 0390/12/203735/01

Place of Performance

Location: MORGANTOWN, MONONGALIA County, WEST VIRGINIA, 26507

State: West Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Energy obligated $152.5 million to US&S - E2 I, LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF DE-FE0023656 - SITE OPERATIONS SUPPORT (SOS) SERVICES FOR THE NATIONAL ENERGY TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY (NETL) SBA REQUIREMENT NO. 0390/12/203735/01 Key points: 1. The contract's cost-plus-award-fee structure incentivizes performance but requires careful monitoring of award fee determinations. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a robust market for these services and potential for competitive pricing. 3. The duration of the contract (over 5 years) indicates a long-term need for these facilities support services. 4. The contract's value places it within a significant spending category for facilities operations and maintenance. 5. Performance was measured against award fee criteria, necessitating clear metrics and objective evaluations. 6. The contract was awarded to a single entity, US&S - E2 I, LLC, highlighting their capability in this specialized area.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of approximately $152.5 million over its 5-year term suggests a substantial investment in facilities support. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale facilities operations contracts would provide a clearer picture of value for money. The cost-plus-award-fee (CPAF) pricing structure allows for cost reimbursement plus a fee that is adjusted based on performance, which can be effective if award criteria are well-defined and performance is rigorously assessed. Without specific performance data or comparable contract details, a definitive value assessment is challenging, but the competitive award process implies a reasonable price was negotiated.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that the opportunity was broadly advertised and multiple bidders were likely considered. The presence of four bidders (no=4) suggests a healthy level of competition for this specialized facilities support service. A competitive process generally leads to better price discovery and encourages contractors to offer competitive terms and innovative solutions to win the award.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of this award is beneficial for taxpayers, as it likely resulted in a more favorable price and better service quality than a sole-source or limited competition scenario.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) facilities, ensuring their continued operation and maintenance. Services delivered include essential site operations support, likely encompassing maintenance, security, utilities, and general facility management. The geographic impact is concentrated in West Virginia, where NETL facilities are located. This contract supports a workforce involved in specialized facilities management and operational roles.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Potential for cost overruns if award fee criteria are not strictly managed.
  • Dependence on a single contractor for critical site operations could pose a risk if performance falters.
  • The complexity of CPAF contracts requires robust oversight to ensure fair and accurate fee determination.

Positive Signals

  • Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive market and likely fair pricing.
  • The CPAF structure incentivizes contractor performance through performance-based award fees.
  • The contract duration suggests a stable and reliable provision of essential services for NETL.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector (NAICS code 561210), a broad category encompassing a wide range of services necessary for the operation and maintenance of buildings and grounds. The market for these services is substantial, driven by government agencies, large corporations, and institutions requiring comprehensive facility management. The Department of Energy's spending in this area is significant, reflecting the operational needs of its numerous research laboratories and facilities. This specific contract supports NETL, a key research institution, highlighting the critical role of such services in enabling scientific endeavors.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb=false) and there is no explicit mention of small business subcontracting requirements in the provided details. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem appears limited, with the primary award going to a larger entity. However, the prime contractor may engage small businesses as subcontractors, which would be a secondary impact not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Energy's contracting officers and program managers. The contract's Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure necessitates diligent monitoring of performance against defined award criteria to ensure fair fee determination and prevent potential cost creep. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to investigations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though specific performance metrics and award fee details may not always be publicly disclosed.

Related Government Programs

  • Department of Energy Facilities Management Contracts
  • National Energy Technology Laboratory Operations
  • Federal Facilities Support Services
  • Cost-Plus-Award-Fee Contracts

Risk Flags

  • Contract Duration
  • Cost-Plus-Award-Fee Structure
  • Performance-Based Incentives
  • Facilities Support Services

Tags

department-of-energy, facilities-support-services, west-virginia, definitive-contract, full-and-open-competition, cost-plus-award-fee, large-contract, site-operations, national-energy-technology-laboratory, us&s-e2-i-llc

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Energy awarded $152.5 million to US&S - E2 I, LLC. IGF::OT::IGF DE-FE0023656 - SITE OPERATIONS SUPPORT (SOS) SERVICES FOR THE NATIONAL ENERGY TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY (NETL) SBA REQUIREMENT NO. 0390/12/203735/01

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is US&S - E2 I, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $152.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-02-01. End: 2020-03-31.

What was the historical spending trend for site operations support at NETL prior to this contract?

Analyzing historical spending for site operations support at NETL before this contract (2015-2020) would provide crucial context. If previous contracts were significantly lower in value, it might suggest an expansion of services or increased operational costs. Conversely, if spending was similar, it indicates a consistent level of investment. Without prior data, it's difficult to ascertain if this $152.5 million represents an increase, decrease, or stable expenditure for NETL's operational needs. Understanding past spending patterns helps in evaluating the reasonableness of the current contract's value and identifying any significant shifts in resource allocation for facility management.

How did US&S - E2 I, LLC perform against the award fee criteria throughout the contract period?

The performance of US&S - E2 I, LLC against the award fee criteria is central to assessing the value realized from this Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract. Detailed performance reports, including the specific metrics used for evaluation and the resulting award fee determinations, would reveal how effectively the contractor met or exceeded expectations. Consistent high ratings would suggest good value and successful service delivery, while lower ratings might indicate performance issues or areas where the contractor struggled. This information is critical for understanding the contractor's track record on this specific engagement and for informing future source selections.

What were the specific services included under 'Site Operations Support' for NETL?

The 'Site Operations Support (SOS)' services for the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) likely encompassed a comprehensive suite of facility management and operational functions. This typically includes, but is not limited to, routine maintenance and repair of buildings and infrastructure, utility management (power, water, HVAC), groundskeeping, waste management, environmental compliance, physical security, access control, janitorial services, and potentially emergency response coordination. The exact scope would be detailed in the contract's Performance Work Statement (PWS), defining the specific tasks, standards, and deliverables required from the contractor to ensure the safe, efficient, and compliant operation of NETL's facilities.

Were there any significant cost variances or overruns during the contract's performance period?

Investigating cost variances or overruns during the contract's performance period (2015-2020) is essential for a complete value assessment. As a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract, the government reimburses allowable costs plus a fee. Significant deviations from the estimated cost baseline could indicate unforeseen challenges, scope creep, or inefficiencies. Analyzing the reasons behind any such variances—whether due to external factors, contractor performance, or government-directed changes—is crucial. Understanding cost performance helps determine if the final expenditure aligned with expectations and provided adequate value relative to the services rendered.

How does the per-unit cost of specific services (e.g., facility maintenance hours) compare to industry benchmarks?

Benchmarking the per-unit cost of specific services provided under this contract against industry standards is a key method for evaluating value for money. For instance, comparing the hourly rates for maintenance technicians, the cost per square foot for facility upkeep, or the price of managing specific utilities against market data for similar facilities in West Virginia or nationally would provide objective insights. If the contract's unit costs are significantly higher than benchmarks without clear justification (e.g., specialized requirements, remote location), it could indicate potential overpricing or inefficiencies. Conversely, costs below benchmarks might suggest favorable negotiation or efficient operations.

What was the total amount paid out in award fees, and what was the contractor's average performance rating?

The total amount paid out in award fees and the contractor's average performance rating are critical indicators of success for this CPAF contract. Award fees are designed to incentivize superior performance. If a substantial portion of the potential award fee was paid out, it suggests the contractor performed well. Conversely, low award fee payouts might signal performance deficiencies. Analyzing the distribution of ratings (e.g., excellent, good, fair) provides a nuanced view of performance over time. This data helps determine if the incentive structure effectively drove desired outcomes and if the government received commensurate value for the fees paid.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation ServicesFacilities Support ServicesFacilities Support Services

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPINGHOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: DE-SOL-0003641

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 50 GRAND AVE, GREENVILLE, SC, 29607

Business Categories: Black American Owned Business, Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $153,003,213

Exercised Options: $153,003,213

Current Obligation: $152,496,148

Actual Outlays: $22,779,384

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline

Start Date: 2015-02-01

Current End Date: 2020-03-31

Potential End Date: 2020-03-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2023-05-05

Other Department of Energy Contracts

View all Department of Energy contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending