DOE's $53.3M Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant infrastructure contract awarded to Swift & Staley Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $53,310,879 ($53.3M)

Contractor: Swift & Staley Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Energy

Start Date: 2005-03-16

End Date: 2010-04-15

Contract Duration: 1,856 days

Daily Burn Rate: $28.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES FOR PADUCAH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT

Place of Performance

Location: PADUCAH, MCCRACKEN County, KENTUCKY, 42002

State: Kentucky Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Energy obligated $53.3 million to SWIFT & STALEY INC. for work described as: INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES FOR PADUCAH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT Key points: 1. Contract awarded for facilities support services at a major nuclear site. 2. The contract utilized full and open competition after exclusion of sources, indicating a specific justification for the procurement approach. 3. Performance-based contract type (Cost Plus Award Fee) incentivizes contractor performance. 4. The contract duration of 1856 days suggests a long-term need for these services. 5. The contract was awarded by the Department of Energy, a key agency in managing nuclear facilities. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 561210 points to facilities support services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without more detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to similar facilities support contracts at other Department of Energy sites. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure means the final cost could vary based on performance. However, the total award amount of $53.3 million over approximately five years suggests a significant investment in maintaining critical infrastructure.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES.' This specific procurement method suggests that while competition was intended, certain sources were excluded, possibly due to specialized requirements or prior performance. The number of bidders is not explicitly stated, but the 'exclusion of sources' implies a more controlled competitive environment than a truly open bid.

Taxpayer Impact: This procurement approach may limit the potential for the lowest possible price due to a restricted bidder pool, potentially impacting taxpayer savings compared to a fully open competition.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Energy and its mission to manage nuclear facilities safely and efficiently. Services delivered include essential infrastructure maintenance and support for the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. The geographic impact is concentrated in Paducah, Kentucky, supporting the local economy through employment and services. Workforce implications include the potential for direct and indirect job creation in facilities management and support roles within the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, a critical component of managing large industrial and governmental sites, particularly those with specialized requirements like nuclear facilities. The market for such services is often characterized by a limited number of highly qualified contractors capable of meeting stringent safety and operational standards. Spending in this sector is driven by the need to maintain aging infrastructure and ensure the ongoing operation of essential government functions.

Small Business Impact

The contract details indicate that small business participation was not a primary focus, as the 'ss' (small business set-aside) field is false. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary contractor, Swift & Staley Inc., is likely a larger entity, and the contract may not significantly contribute to the small business ecosystem unless specific subcontracting opportunities arise independently.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of Energy's contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are built into the Cost Plus Award Fee structure, which links a portion of the payment to performance outcomes. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports may be internal. The Inspector General for the Department of Energy would have jurisdiction to investigate any potential fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

infrastructure-services, facilities-support, department-of-energy, paducah-gaseous-diffusion-plant, swift-and-staley-inc, cost-plus-award-fee, definitive-contract, full-and-open-competition-after-exclusion-of-sources, kentucky, large-contract, nuclear-facilities, government-contracting

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Energy awarded $53.3 million to SWIFT & STALEY INC.. INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES FOR PADUCAH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SWIFT & STALEY INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $53.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-03-16. End: 2010-04-15.

What is the track record of Swift & Staley Inc. with Department of Energy contracts, particularly for facilities support?

Swift & Staley Inc. has a history of performing services for the Department of Energy. While specific details on their track record for facilities support at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant require deeper analysis of past performance evaluations and contract history, their selection for this significant contract suggests they met the agency's requirements. A comprehensive review would involve examining past performance metrics, any documented issues or commendations, and their experience with similar large-scale, specialized government facilities. Understanding their prior success rates and any challenges encountered on similar projects would provide crucial context for assessing their capability and reliability in executing this current contract.

How does the awarded amount of $53.3 million compare to similar facilities support contracts at other DOE sites?

Comparing the $53.3 million award for infrastructure services at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant requires careful consideration of contract scope, duration, and the specific nature of the facility. Facilities support contracts at other Department of Energy sites can vary significantly in cost due to differences in plant size, age, operational complexity, and the specific services required (e.g., environmental remediation, security, maintenance). For instance, contracts at larger or more hazardous sites might command higher figures. Without a direct comparison of contracts with identical service lines and facility types, a precise benchmark is difficult. However, $53.3 million over approximately five years indicates a substantial, ongoing investment in maintaining critical infrastructure, which is typical for major government installations.

What are the primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract for facilities support?

The primary risks associated with a Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract for facilities support revolve around cost control and performance definition. For the government, there's a risk that costs could escalate beyond initial projections if the base cost-plus component is not tightly managed or if the award fee criteria are too easily met, leading to higher overall expenditures. Contractors may be incentivized to maximize award fees, potentially leading to scope creep or focusing on easily achievable performance metrics rather than the most critical operational needs. For the contractor, the risk lies in not meeting the performance standards required to earn the award fee, thus reducing their profit margin. Effective oversight and clearly defined, measurable performance metrics are crucial to mitigate these risks.

What does the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' procurement method imply for this contract?

The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' method implies a specific scenario where the agency initially intended full and open competition but later determined that certain sources needed to be excluded. This exclusion must be justified by specific criteria, such as unique capabilities, past performance, or national security considerations. It suggests that while multiple bidders were considered, the pool was narrowed based on predefined reasons. This approach aims to balance competition with the need for specialized expertise or to address specific program requirements that might not be met by all potential offerors. The justification for exclusion is critical for ensuring fairness and maximizing value for the government.

How has historical spending on facilities support services at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant trended over time?

Analyzing historical spending trends for facilities support services at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant is essential for understanding the long-term investment in the site and identifying any significant shifts in operational needs or contract values. Without access to specific historical spending data for this contract or similar services at the plant, a trend analysis cannot be performed. However, generally, spending on such services at aging government facilities can fluctuate based on infrastructure upgrades, decommissioning activities, or changes in regulatory requirements. A review of past contracts, their values, and durations would reveal whether spending has been consistent, increasing, or decreasing, providing context for the current $53.3 million award.

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: DERP2404OH20178

Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 917 1/2 S 21ST ST, PADUCAH, KY, 42003

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $54,491,368

Exercised Options: $54,491,368

Current Obligation: $53,310,879

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Timeline

Start Date: 2005-03-16

Current End Date: 2010-04-15

Potential End Date: 2010-04-15 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2023-03-30

More Contracts from Swift & Staley Inc.

View all Swift & Staley Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Energy Contracts

View all Department of Energy contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending