DOE's $6.5B Hanford Management Contract Awarded to Fluor Hanford, Inc. for Facilities Support Services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $6,542,040,041 ($6.5B)

Contractor: Fluor Hanford, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Energy

Start Date: 1999-10-15

End Date: 2009-08-23

Contract Duration: 3,600 days

Daily Burn Rate: $1.8M/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: PROJECT HANFORD MANAGEMENT CONTRACT MANAGE AND INTEGRATE THE HANFORD SITE IN SOUTHEAST WASHINGTON STATE

Place of Performance

Location: RICHLAND, BENTON County, WASHINGTON, 99352

State: Washington Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Energy obligated $6.54 billion to FLUOR HANFORD, INC. for work described as: PROJECT HANFORD MANAGEMENT CONTRACT MANAGE AND INTEGRATE THE HANFORD SITE IN SOUTHEAST WASHINGTON STATE Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a robust market evaluation. 2. The contract type, Cost Plus Award Fee, incentivizes performance but requires careful oversight. 3. Duration of the contract (3600 days) indicates a long-term commitment to managing the Hanford site. 4. The significant value suggests a complex and critical operation with substantial resource requirements. 5. Facilities Support Services (NAICS 561210) is a broad category, implying a wide range of managed activities. 6. The contract was awarded in 1999 and ended in 2009, providing historical data for performance analysis.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific performance metrics and detailed cost breakdowns. However, the total value of over $6.5 billion over approximately 10 years indicates a substantial investment in managing a complex federal site. Comparisons to similar large-scale facilities management contracts would be necessary to assess value for money. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure implies that contractor performance directly impacts the final payment, offering a mechanism for value realization if managed effectively.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. This competitive process is generally expected to drive better pricing and service quality as contractors vie for the award. The number of bidders and the specifics of the evaluation process would provide further insight into the intensity of the competition and its impact on price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process for a contract of this magnitude is beneficial for taxpayers, as it increases the likelihood of securing services at a reasonable cost and encourages innovation from potential providers.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Energy and the public, through the safe and effective management of the Hanford Site. Services delivered include comprehensive management and integration of operations at the Hanford Site. The geographic impact is concentrated in Southeast Washington State, where the Hanford Site is located. Workforce implications include employment for a significant number of personnel involved in site operations, maintenance, and management.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

The Hanford Site is a critical federal facility with a long history of nuclear material production and cleanup. Contracts for its management fall within the Facilities Support Services sector, which encompasses a wide range of services including operation, maintenance, and management of government-owned facilities. The market for such services is competitive, with large, experienced contractors often bidding on significant government contracts. Benchmarking would involve comparing this contract's value and scope to other large-scale federal facilities management or environmental remediation contracts.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements for this contract. Analysis of small business participation would require further investigation into the contract's specific clauses and performance reports. Without this information, it's difficult to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the Department of Energy. Mechanisms likely included regular performance reviews, audits, and adherence to the terms of the Cost Plus Award Fee structure. Transparency would depend on the DOE's reporting practices regarding contract performance and expenditures. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply to any potential fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

department-of-energy, facilities-support-services, hanford-site, washington-state, definitive-contract, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, environmental-management, nuclear-facility

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Energy awarded $6.54 billion to FLUOR HANFORD, INC.. PROJECT HANFORD MANAGEMENT CONTRACT MANAGE AND INTEGRATE THE HANFORD SITE IN SOUTHEAST WASHINGTON STATE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FLUOR HANFORD, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $6.54 billion.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1999-10-15. End: 2009-08-23.

What was Fluor Hanford, Inc.'s performance track record on this specific contract?

Assessing Fluor Hanford, Inc.'s performance track record on the Project Hanford Management Contract requires access to detailed performance reports, award fee determinations, and any associated contract modifications or disputes. As a Cost Plus Award Fee contract, Fluor's compensation would have been tied to meeting specific performance objectives. Without direct access to these internal performance evaluations, it is difficult to provide a definitive assessment. However, the contract's duration (nearly 10 years) suggests a level of sustained performance acceptable to the Department of Energy, though it does not preclude periods of underperformance or areas for improvement that would have been addressed through the award fee mechanism.

How does the total contract value compare to similar large-scale federal facilities management contracts?

The total contract value of approximately $6.54 billion over roughly 10 years equates to an average annual value of about $654 million. This figure places it among the larger federal facilities management and site operations contracts. For comparison, other major federal site management contracts, such as those at the Nevada National Security Site or various Department of Defense installations, often fall within similar multi-hundred-million-dollar annual ranges. The specific nature of the Hanford Site, involving complex environmental and security considerations, likely contributes to its significant cost. A precise comparison would necessitate analyzing contracts with similar scopes of work, geographic scale, and operational complexities.

What were the primary risks associated with managing the Hanford Site under this contract?

The primary risks associated with managing the Hanford Site under this contract were multifaceted. Operationally, risks included ensuring the safe handling and storage of nuclear materials, managing aging infrastructure, and preventing environmental contamination. Programmatically, risks involved meeting stringent regulatory compliance requirements from agencies like the EPA and state regulators, and managing the complex cleanup and disposition activities. Financially, risks included potential cost overruns due to the unpredictable nature of environmental remediation and the complexities of the site, as well as ensuring effective utilization of taxpayer funds under the Cost Plus Award Fee structure. Contractor performance risks, such as workforce availability, safety incidents, and project delays, were also significant.

How effective was the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure in ensuring program effectiveness at Hanford?

The effectiveness of the CPAF structure hinges on the clarity and measurability of the award fee criteria established by the Department of Energy. When well-defined, these criteria incentivize the contractor to meet or exceed performance targets in areas like safety, environmental protection, cost control, and schedule adherence. For a complex operation like Hanford, CPAF can be effective in driving desired outcomes by linking a portion of the contractor's profit to performance. However, poorly defined criteria or lax oversight can lead to inflated award fees without commensurate improvements in effectiveness, or conversely, demotivate contractors if criteria are perceived as unattainable. Detailed reviews of award fee determinations and performance metrics would be needed to fully assess its effectiveness in this specific case.

What are the historical spending patterns for Hanford site management over the past two decades?

Historical spending patterns for Hanford site management over the past two decades show a consistent and substantial federal investment. The Project Hanford Management Contract, awarded in 1999 and ending in 2009, represented a significant portion of this spending, totaling over $6.5 billion. Subsequent contracts for managing and cleaning up the site have continued this trend, with annual expenditures often in the hundreds of millions of dollars. The overall spending reflects the ongoing, long-term commitment required for environmental remediation, facility maintenance, and operational security at the vast Hanford complex. Fluctuations in spending can be attributed to shifts in program priorities, regulatory requirements, and the progression of cleanup milestones.

What was the total amount paid to Fluor Hanford, Inc. under this specific contract?

The provided data indicates the total award value for the "PROJECT HANFORD MANAGEMENT CONTRACT" was $6,542,040,041.34. This figure represents the estimated total cost plus the potential award fee over the life of the contract. To determine the exact amount paid, one would need to consult the contract's final payment records, which would account for actual costs incurred and the specific award fees earned based on performance evaluations throughout the contract period. The award value serves as the ceiling and a strong indicator of the financial commitment made.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: OPERATION OF GOVT OWNED FACILITYOPERATE RESTORATION ACTIVITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Fluor Corporation (UEI: 006907190)

Address: 2420 STEVENS DR, RICHLAND, WA, 99354

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $4,638,111,357

Exercised Options: $4,638,111,356

Current Obligation: $6,542,040,041

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline

Start Date: 1999-10-15

Current End Date: 2009-08-23

Potential End Date: 2009-08-23 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2017-08-31

Other Department of Energy Contracts

View all Department of Energy contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending