NRC awards $2M+ to Southwest Research Institute for environmental impact analysis of nuclear waste facility
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $2,017,797 ($2.0M)
Contractor: Southwest Research Institute
Awarding Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Start Date: 2018-09-27
End Date: 2023-09-30
Contract Duration: 1,829 days
Daily Burn Rate: $1.1K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR HOLTEC INTERNATIONAL'S LICENSE APPLICATION REQUEST FOR A CONSOLIDATED INTERIM STORAGE FACILITY FOR SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH LEVEL WASTE
Place of Performance
Location: SAN ANTONIO, BEXAR County, TEXAS, 78238
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Nuclear Regulatory Commission obligated $2.0 million to SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE for work described as: TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR HOLTEC INTERNATIONAL'S LICENSE APPLICATION REQUEST FOR A CONSOLIDATED INTERIM STORAGE FACILITY FOR SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH LEVEL WASTE Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical environmental impact assessment for a novel nuclear waste storage solution. 2. Sole-source award raises questions about potential cost efficiencies and market alternatives. 3. Long performance period (5 years) suggests complexity and potential for scope creep. 4. Contract type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) may incentivize cost escalation. 5. Awardee has a history of technical services, but specific experience with this type of facility needs further review. 6. Geographic focus on Texas highlights regional implications for waste management.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The contract value of approximately $2 million over five years for technical assistance in developing an environmental impact statement appears reasonable given the complexity of nuclear waste storage. However, without comparable sole-source contracts for similar environmental impact statements, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, while allowing for flexibility, can sometimes lead to higher costs than fixed-price contracts if not closely managed. Benchmarking against other large-scale environmental consulting projects for federal agencies would provide further context.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) did not conduct a competitive bidding process. This approach is typically justified when only one responsible source is available or when there is a compelling urgency. The lack of competition means that price discovery through market forces was bypassed, and the government relied on negotiation to establish a fair price. The justification for this sole-source award would need to demonstrate why other qualified entities could not perform the work.
Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can potentially lead to higher costs for taxpayers compared to competitively bid contracts, as the absence of competition reduces pressure on the contractor to offer the lowest possible price.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is Holtec International, which receives critical technical support for its license application. The public benefits from a thorough environmental review process, ensuring potential risks associated with nuclear waste storage are identified and addressed. The geographic impact is concentrated in Texas, where the proposed Consolidated Interim Storage Facility would be located. The contract supports specialized technical expertise within the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's oversight functions.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type can incentivize cost overruns if not rigorously managed.
- Long contract duration (5 years) increases the risk of scope creep and potential for schedule delays.
- Lack of transparency in the sole-source justification could obscure potential alternatives or better pricing.
- The specialized nature of the work might limit the pool of qualified contractors, but a broader search should be considered.
Positive Signals
- Awardee (Southwest Research Institute) is a reputable research organization with relevant technical capabilities.
- The contract addresses a critical need for environmental impact assessment in nuclear waste management.
- The work directly supports the NRC's mandate to ensure public safety and environmental protection.
- The contract is for a specific, well-defined technical assistance task.
Sector Analysis
The contract falls within the broader energy and environmental consulting sector, specifically focusing on regulatory compliance and environmental impact assessment for hazardous waste management. The market for such specialized services is relatively niche, often involving firms with deep expertise in nuclear engineering, environmental science, and regulatory law. The value of this contract is modest within the context of large-scale federal environmental projects, but its criticality stems from the sensitive nature of nuclear materials and the regulatory oversight required.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not competed and there is no indication of small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. As a sole-source award to a large research institute, it is unlikely to have direct positive implications for the small business ecosystem in this specific instance. Future competitive procurements in this area could potentially include set-aside goals.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight is primarily conducted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) program officials responsible for the environmental review process. Accountability is tied to the successful completion of the environmental impact statement according to established regulatory standards. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award; the justification for this approach and the detailed cost breakdowns would typically be internal NRC documents, though summaries may be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- Nuclear Waste Disposal
- Environmental Impact Statements
- Federal Regulatory Compliance
- Hazardous Materials Management
- Energy Sector Consulting
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award
- Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type
- Potential for cost escalation
- Limited competition
Tags
nuclear-energy, environmental-impact-assessment, hazardous-waste, sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee, nuclear-regulatory-commission, southwest-research-institute, texas, technical-assistance, long-term-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Nuclear Regulatory Commission awarded $2.0 million to SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR HOLTEC INTERNATIONAL'S LICENSE APPLICATION REQUEST FOR A CONSOLIDATED INTERIM STORAGE FACILITY FOR SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND HIGH LEVEL WASTE
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Nuclear Regulatory Commission).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $2.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2018-09-27. End: 2023-09-30.
What is Southwest Research Institute's specific track record with environmental impact statements for nuclear facilities?
Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) is a well-established independent, nonprofit applied research and development organization. While SwRI has extensive expertise in various engineering and scientific fields, including those relevant to nuclear energy and environmental science, their specific track record in preparing full Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) for nuclear facilities, particularly for consolidated interim storage, requires detailed examination. Their capabilities likely encompass the technical analysis and data generation needed for an EIS, but the direct experience in authoring and managing the entire EIS process for a facility of this nature would be a key factor. Publicly available information may not detail every EIS they have contributed to, necessitating a review of their past performance reports or direct inquiries to the NRC regarding their specific role and success in similar past projects.
How does the $2M+ cost compare to similar environmental impact statement contracts for nuclear facilities?
Benchmarking the $2,077,96.85 cost for this environmental impact statement (EIS) contract against similar federal procurements is challenging due to the specialized nature of nuclear waste storage and the sole-source award. Typically, EIS processes for large infrastructure projects, especially those involving nuclear materials, are complex and can range from several hundred thousand to several million dollars, depending on the scope, site-specific conditions, and regulatory requirements. The five-year duration of this contract suggests a comprehensive review. Without access to detailed cost breakdowns and the specific scope of work for comparable sole-source or competitively bid EIS contracts for similar facilities (e.g., other interim storage or disposal sites), a precise comparison is difficult. However, the value appears within a plausible range for such a critical and lengthy environmental review.
What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for this type of service?
The primary risk associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract for developing an environmental impact statement (EIS) is the potential for cost escalation. In a CPFF structure, the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. While the fixed fee provides some incentive for the contractor to control costs (as it doesn't increase with actual costs), the government bears the risk of cost overruns. If the project scope expands or unforeseen technical challenges arise, the total cost to the government can increase significantly. This contrasts with fixed-price contracts, where the contractor assumes more cost risk. For a complex EIS, especially one that might encounter unexpected environmental findings or regulatory changes, the CPFF structure necessitates robust government oversight to manage expenditures effectively and ensure the fixed fee remains appropriate for the work performed.
What is the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) typical approach to procuring environmental impact statement services?
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) typically procures services for environmental impact statements (EIS) through a combination of competitive and sole-source contracting, depending on the specific circumstances. For standard or broadly applicable environmental reviews, the NRC often utilizes full and open competition to solicit proposals from a range of qualified environmental consulting firms. This approach aims to leverage market competition to achieve best value and pricing. However, in situations where a specific expertise is required that only one or a limited number of contractors possess, or when there's a critical need tied to a specific applicant's license process (as may be the case here with Holtec International), the NRC may justify a sole-source award. The agency's procurement policies emphasize maximizing competition while ensuring that necessary specialized services are obtained efficiently and effectively.
How does the geographic location in Texas influence the environmental impact assessment?
The geographic location in Texas significantly influences the environmental impact assessment (EIS) for Holtec International's proposed Consolidated Interim Storage Facility. The EIS must thoroughly evaluate potential environmental effects specific to the Texas environment, including its unique geological conditions, hydrology, climate, ecosystems, and potential impacts on local communities and natural resources. Factors such as seismic activity, groundwater contamination risks, air quality, and the presence of endangered species within the proposed site's vicinity must be rigorously studied. Furthermore, the assessment needs to consider transportation routes for spent nuclear fuel within and potentially through Texas, evaluating risks associated with transport. The socio-economic impacts on local populations, including potential effects on land use, infrastructure, and emergency preparedness, are also critical components directly tied to the Texas location.
What are the implications of this contract being 'NOT COMPETED' for taxpayer value?
The 'NOT COMPETED' designation, indicating a sole-source award, has direct implications for taxpayer value. When a contract is not competed, the government foregoes the benefits of market competition, which typically drives down prices and encourages innovation. Without competing offers, there is less pressure on the selected contractor (Southwest Research Institute, in this case) to offer the most cost-effective solution. The government must rely on negotiation and its own cost analysis to ensure a fair price, which can be more challenging and potentially less advantageous than a competitive process. This can lead to higher overall costs for taxpayers compared to what might have been achieved through a competitive bidding scenario where multiple firms vie for the contract based on price and technical merit.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Waste Treatment and Disposal › Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal
Product/Service Code: SPECIAL STUDIES/ANALYSIS, NOT R&D › SPECIAL STUDIES - NOT R and D
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 6220 CULEBRA RD, SAN ANTONIO, TX, 78238
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Nonprofit Organization, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $2,132,835
Exercised Options: $2,038,034
Current Obligation: $2,017,797
Actual Outlays: $1,348,121
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: 31310018D0001
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2018-09-27
Current End Date: 2023-09-30
Potential End Date: 2023-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-01-20
More Contracts from Southwest Research Institute
- TAS::80 0120::TAS AS the Principal Investigator (PI) Institution for the Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) Instrument Suite Science Team (isst), the Contractor IS Responsible for Leading the Solving Magnetospheric Acceleration Reconnection and Turbulence (smart) Team Through ALL Mission Phases. the Scope of Work Shall Include, BUT NOT BE Limited, to the Following: - Manage the Smart Team Through Phases B Through E of the MMS Mission, - Defining Science Goals and Objectives - Assist the MMS Project and HQ Science Mission Directorate Heliophysics Division in the Preparation of Level 1 Requirements for the MMS Mission - Flow-Down of Top-Level Mission Requirements to the Appropriate Elements of the Instrument Suite - Design, Fabrication, Integration, Calibration, Testing and Delivery of Four Fully Qualified, Flight Instrument Suites to Observatory Integration and Test (I&T) Plus Spares - Design, Development, Integration and Testing of the SOC - Support Observatory-Level I&T Activities - Provide Sustaining Engineering and I&T Support of the Instrument Suites After Delivery to Nasa - Responsibility for the On-Orbit Operation, Health and Safety of the Instrument Suites - Responsibility for Operating and Maintaining the SOC Post-Launch - Establishing and Managing Subcontracts With Instrument Suite Team Members - Establishing and Maintaining the Required International Traffic in Arms Regulations (itar) and Export Control Documentation Necessary for Working With ITS International Team Members - Implementation of an EPO Program for the MMS Mission — $383.4M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- THE National Aeronautics and Space Administration HAS Selected Juno NEW Frontiers Mission Under the Direction of Principal Investigator (PI) DR. Scott Bolton to Continue Development With the Expectation That the Juno Mission Will Enter Phase B in Early Fiscal Year 2006. the Juno Mission Will BE Managed by the Marshall Space Flight Center, NEW Frontiers Program Office. KEY Juno Team Members Include DR. Bolton's Home Institution, the Southwest Research Institute (swri), the Juno Implementation Team Leader JET Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and the Spacecraft BUS Provider the Lockheed Martin Space Systems Division (lm/Ss). the PI'S Team AT Swri Needs to Begin Work on a Subset of Phase B Activities AS Early in FY06 AS Possible. This SOW Provides a List of Activities That ARE Necessary to Begin Work in FY06 and Their Associated Deliverables. the Juno Mission IS a Collaboration Between Southwest Research Institute (swri), JPL, Lockheed Martin (LM), and a Complementary Team of Universities and Field Centers. the Principal Investigator, DR. Scott Bolton, IS AT Southwest Research Institute (swri) and IS Responsible to Nasa for ALL Aspects of the Mission Including Achieving ALL Scientific Objectives and Mission Goals. JPL Provides the Project Manager WHO Oversees the Day-To-Day Management of the Project and Will Report to the PI. Principal Investigator (PI) DR. Scott Bolton IS Responsible to Nasa for Meeting the Scientific Objectives of the Juno Mission Within Cost and Schedule. AS PI, DR. Bolton HAS Direct Accountability to the Nasa NEW Frontiers Program Office for the Implementation of Juno. ALL Juno Science Co-Is, the Deputy PI and Project Scientist, the Science Investigation Office Manager, the E/PO Effort, the Juno Advisory Board and the PM Report Directly to DR. Bolton. the PI Delegates the Day-To-Day Management of the Project to the Project Manager (PM), Rick Grammier. the Project System Engineer, Payload Manager, Flight System Manager, Mission Manager, Science OPS Center, Business Manager, LM Contract CTM, and Mission Assurance Manager ALL Report Directly to the PM — $184.3M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- NEW Horizon -- Pluto Mission Phase B — $166.9M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- Under This Contract, the Contractor Will Provide the Personnel, Materials, Equipment, and Facilities Necessary to Produce the Polarimeter to Unify the Corona Heliosphere (punch) Phase a Concept Study. the Scope of This Effort Includes, BUT IS NOT Limited TO: 1. Principal Investigator Program Office 2. Instrument System Engineering, Including Instrument Mission Assurance 3. Design of a Flight Qualified Punch Instrument Meeting Mission and Science Requirements 4. Develop Plans in Support of Integration and Test of the Punch Instrument Flight System 5. Develop Plans in Support of Essential Field Operations 6. Develop Plans in Support of Launch Operations and Flight Operations 7. Develop Plans for Lead the Punch Science Investigation AS Well AS the Generation of Resulting Data Products the Contractor Shall Provide a Briefing on the Punch Science and Science Implementation Plan AT the Phase a Site Visit. the Contractor Shall Provide an Organization Chart Defining Contractor Roles and Responsibilities, Reporting Procedures, and ALL Lines of Authority. the Contractor Shall Participate in Defining the Relationships Between the Contractor's Program Office and the Nasa Explorers Program Office. the Contractor Shall Develop a Punch Instrument Systems Requirements Document and a Punch Mission Systems Requirements Document. the Contractor Will Also Develop Detailed Block Diagrams and Technical Descriptions of ALL Instrument Systems. the Contractor Will Conduct In-Depth Instrument-Level Reviews of the Proposed Instrument Design. They Will Conduct Essential Trade Studies, Analyses, Modeling and Simulations to Assure Compliance With Instrument Requirements. the Contractor Will Lead the Science Team and Develop an Instrument-Level Test Plan and Participate in Planning for Integration and Test. the Contractor Shall Prepare a Detailed Instrument Development Schedule Covering ALL Mission Phases, Listing Major Milestones, Including a Defined Critical Path and Schedule Reserves. the Contractor Will Prepare Updated Instrument Budgets AS Well AS Review and Approve the Overall Punch Budget. Finally, the Contractor Shall Prepare and Submit the Concept Study Report — $139.2M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- TAS::80 0120::TAS the Contractor Shall BE Responsible for the Conduct of ALL Phases and Aspects of the Ibex Mission Including: 1) Life-Cycle Project Management; 2) Design, Test, Development, and Operations (payload, Spacecraft, Launch Vehicle, Spacecraft to Launch-Vehicle Interfaces, Launch and Flight Operations); and 3) Post-Operations Data Analysis and Archiving. in Performance of This Effort, the Ibex Team Shall: a. Manage the Project, Provide Cost and Schedule Information to Nasa AS Specified in 3.0 Management, Above. B. Provide Day-To-Day Management and Coordination of the Project AS Delegated by the PI to the Project Manager (PM), Including Monitoring and Reporting Technical Progress and Financial Status, Implementing the Risk Management Plan and Conducting Mission Level Reviews AS Specified in Section 4.3, System Level Reviews. C. Conduct Reviews for ALL Payload Sensors, Payload Support Infrastructure and Associated GSE. D. Perform Scientific Analyses in Support of the Mission Science Requirements. E. Perform Systems Engineering to Coordinate the Design of the Instrument Complement and Spacecraft BUS Components; and to Ensure the Compatibility of the Space-To-Ground and Network Communications. F. Perform Trade Studies to Eliminate and Mitigate Risks G. Deliver the Ibex Flight Segment to Vandenberg AIR Force Base (vafb), Support Integration With the Launch Vehicle, and Assist the Launch Operations; H. Establish the Mission Control Center (MCC) and Ibex Science Operations and Data Analysis Center (isoc) Including ALL Computers, Networks, and Operating Software, Instrument Databases and Procedures Necessary to Functionally Test and Later Control the Spacecraft; I. Hold Science Team Meetings AS Well AS Technical Interchange Meetings. J. Baseline the Science Requirements and Science Analysis Plan Into an Ibex Mission Definition Requirements Agreement (mdra) and the Ibex Data Management Plan. K. Implement an Approved Mission Assurance Plan. L. Implement a Systems Engineering Function to Verify Performance Specification Compliance to the Mission Science Requirements. M. Design, Fabricate, Integrate and Test the Payload, Spacecraft, Solid Rocket Motor and Launch Vehicle Adapter, and Integrate the Ibex Flight Segment With the Launch Vehicle. N. Implement a Safety Program Including the Generation of the Missile System Pre-Launch Safety Package (mspsp). O. Support Launch, Perform On-Orbit Checkout, and Establish On-Orbit Data Acquisition Contact With the Payload. Within the First 30 Days After Launch, Initial Engineering and Science Checkout and Verification of Spacecraft In-Flight Operation Will BE Performed. P. Provide the Services of the MCC and the Isoc. Q. Conduct the E/PO Program in Cooperation With the Identified Team Members — $116.1M (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
Other Nuclear Regulatory Commission Contracts
- (information Technology Infrastructure Support Services (itiss)) — $208.2M (NTT Data Services Federal Government, LLC)
- Infrastructure Services and Support Contract — $157.8M (CACI NSS, LLC)
- Glinda Sncc BPA Call — $128.2M (Teksynap Corporation)
- Information Technology Infrastructure Support Services (itiss) — $100.7M (NTT Data Services Federal Government, LLC)
- Integrated Source Management Portfolio — $82.3M (Leidos, Inc.)