Department of Defense Awards $143M Gas Services Contract to Puget Sound Energy Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $143,255,883 ($143.3M)

Contractor: Puget Sound Energy Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2000-04-07

End Date: 2019-09-30

Contract Duration: 7,115 days

Daily Burn Rate: $20.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Energy

Official Description: 199712!2100!0284!KF57 !DIRECTORATE OF CONTRACTING !DAKF5783C0080 !A!*!206308 !19970102!19970102!803627892!803627892!007942113!Y!0CC51!PUGET SOUND ENERGY (INC) !10608 NE 4TH ST !BELLEVUE !WA!98004!24915!053!53!FORT LEWIS !PIERCE !WASHINGTON!0001!+000000124572!N!N!000000000000!S111!GAS SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !4924!3!*!*!*!A!*!*!B !*!*!0!000!*!* !*!*!*!* !* !*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!* !*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!

Place of Performance

Location: TACOMA, PIERCE County, WASHINGTON, 98433

State: Washington Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $143.3 million to PUGET SOUND ENERGY INC for work described as: 199712!2100!0284!KF57 !DIRECTORATE OF CONTRACTING !DAKF5783C0080 !A!*!206308 !19970102!19970102!803627892!803627892!007942113!Y!0CC51!PUGET SOUND ENERGY (INC) !10608 NE 4TH ST !BELLEVUE !WA!98004!24915!053!53!FORT LEWIS !PIERCE !WASHINGTON!0001!+000000124572!N!N!000000000000!S111… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for gas services to Puget Sound Energy Inc. 2. Significant contract value of over $143 million. 3. Contract duration spans from 1997 to 2019. 4. Awarded by the Department of the Army, Directorate of Contracting at Fort Lewis. 5. Contract type is Firm Fixed Price.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value is substantial at over $143 million. Without comparable contracts or detailed cost breakdowns, assessing its pricing against similar services is difficult. The long duration might indicate stable pricing, but also potential for overpayment if market rates changed significantly.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was not available for competition, suggesting a limited or sole-source award. This limits price discovery and potentially leads to higher costs for taxpayers compared to a competitive bidding process.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition for a contract of this magnitude raises concerns about potential overspending and inefficient use of taxpayer funds.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may have paid more due to the lack of competitive bidding. Long-term commitment to a single provider could stifle innovation in energy services. The extended contract period raises questions about adaptability to changing energy needs and technologies. Ensuring fair pricing over two decades without competition is a significant oversight challenge.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition
Long contract duration
Potential for overpricing

Positive Signals

Clear service provider identified
Defined contract type (FFP)

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Energy sector, specifically for gas services. Federal spending on energy infrastructure and services can be substantial, with benchmarks varying widely based on the type and scale of the service required.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication in the provided data whether small businesses were involved in this contract, either as prime contractors or subcontractors. Further investigation would be needed to determine any small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' designation suggests potential weaknesses in oversight regarding the justification for a non-competitive award. Accountability for ensuring fair pricing and value for money over such a long period is crucial.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about price fairness.
Extended contract duration (22 years) increases risk of overpayment.
Potential for vendor lock-in and reduced flexibility.
Limited transparency on cost justification.
No clear indication of small business participation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $143.3 million to PUGET SOUND ENERGY INC. 199712!2100!0284!KF57 !DIRECTORATE OF CONTRACTING !DAKF5783C0080 !A!*!206308 !19970102!19970102!803627892!803627892!007942113!Y!0CC51!PUGET SOUND ENERGY (INC) !10608 NE 4TH ST !BELLEVUE !WA!98004!24915!053!53!FORT LEWIS !PIERCE !WASHINGTON!0001!+000000124572!N!N!000000000000!S111!GAS SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !4924!3!*!*!*!A!*!*!B !*!*!0!000!*!* !*!*!*!* !* !*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!* !*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PUGET SOUND ENERGY INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $143.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2000-04-07. End: 2019-09-30.

What was the justification for awarding this contract on a non-competitive basis?

The provided data states the contract was 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION.' This typically implies a sole-source justification, such as a unique capability, urgent need, or lack of other qualified sources. However, without further documentation, the specific rationale remains unclear and warrants deeper investigation to ensure it was appropriate and in the government's best interest.

How was the pricing determined and validated given the lack of competition?

With the contract being non-competitive, standard price discovery mechanisms like sealed bids or competitive proposals were bypassed. Pricing would likely be based on negotiation, historical data, or cost-plus arrangements. Assessing the fairness and reasonableness of the price over the contract's long duration requires detailed cost analysis and comparison to market rates at various points.

What mechanisms were in place to ensure the government received value for money over the contract's 22-year span?

A 22-year contract term without competition presents a significant challenge for ensuring value. Oversight would need to include regular reviews of performance, market price comparisons, and potential renegotiation clauses. The absence of competitive pressure over such an extended period raises concerns about whether the government consistently received the best possible pricing and service quality.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Puget Sound Energy Inc. (UEI: 831703157)

Address: 10885 NE 4TH ST STE 1200, BELLEVUE, WA, 98004

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline