DOE's $19.9M SSFL EIS contract awarded to CDM JV for environmental remediation services in California

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,910,235 ($19.9M)

Contractor: CDM a Joint Venture

Awarding Agency: Department of Energy

Start Date: 2008-01-10

End Date: 2012-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,725 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.5K/day

Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: AREA IV SANTA SUSANA FIELD LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (AREA IV SSFL EIS)

Place of Performance

Location: CANOGA PARK, LOS ANGELES County, CALIFORNIA, 91309

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Energy obligated $19.9 million to CDM A JOINT VENTURE for work described as: AREA IV SANTA SUSANA FIELD LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (AREA IV SSFL EIS) Key points: 1. Contract awarded competitively, suggesting potential for good value, but specific pricing details are needed for full assessment. 2. The contract duration of 1725 days indicates a significant, long-term project. 3. Focus on environmental remediation highlights a critical area of federal responsibility. 4. The use of a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure requires careful monitoring to control costs. 5. The contract was awarded as a delivery order under a larger IDIQ, indicating a pre-competed framework. 6. The geographic focus on California is noted.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $19.9 million for environmental remediation services over approximately 4.75 years appears reasonable for a project of this scope. However, without detailed breakdowns of labor hours, material costs, and overhead, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. Comparing this to similar large-scale environmental impact statements and remediation projects would provide better context. The CPFF structure necessitates close oversight to ensure costs remain within expected bounds and do not escalate due to inefficiencies.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded as a competitive delivery order, indicating that multiple vendors likely had the opportunity to bid. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a reasonable level of competition for this specific task. A competitive process generally leads to better price discovery and encourages contractors to offer competitive terms. The fact that it was a delivery order under a larger contract implies the initial IDIQ was also competed.

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

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Energy and potentially the public through the environmental cleanup and assessment at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory. The services delivered involve extensive environmental impact analysis and remediation planning. The geographic impact is localized to the Santa Susana Field Laboratory site in California. The contract supports a workforce involved in environmental science, engineering, and project management.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

Environmental remediation and consulting services represent a significant sector within government contracting. This contract falls under the broader environmental services industry, which includes site assessment, cleanup, waste management, and compliance. The market for these services is driven by regulatory requirements and the need to address historical contamination at federal facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other large-scale EIS and remediation contracts awarded by agencies like the EPA and DoD.

Small Business Impact

Information regarding small business participation, including set-asides or subcontracting plans, was not explicitly provided in the data. Typically, large environmental remediation contracts may include provisions for small business involvement, but this specific award's details are unknown. Further investigation would be needed to determine the extent of small business engagement and its impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Energy's contracting and program management offices. The Inspector General's office for the DOE would have jurisdiction for audits and investigations into potential fraud, waste, or abuse. Transparency would be enhanced through public reporting of the EIS findings and the progress of remediation activities.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

environmental-remediation, environmental-impact-statement, department-of-energy, california, competitive-delivery-order, cost-plus-fixed-fee, remediation-services, federal-facility-cleanup, large-contract, environmental-consulting

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Energy awarded $19.9 million to CDM A JOINT VENTURE. AREA IV SANTA SUSANA FIELD LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (AREA IV SSFL EIS)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CDM A JOINT VENTURE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $19.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-01-10. End: 2012-09-30.

What is the track record of CDM A JOINT VENTURE in performing similar environmental remediation contracts for the federal government?

Assessing the track record of CDM A JOINT VENTURE requires a review of their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those involving large-scale environmental impact statements and remediation projects. Databases like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) and contract performance reports (e.g., CPARS) would provide insights into their on-time delivery, cost performance, and overall quality of work. A history of successful, similar projects would indicate a lower risk for this current contract. Conversely, past issues with cost overruns, schedule delays, or quality deficiencies would raise concerns about their capability to execute the AREA IV SANTA SUSANA FIELD LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (AREA IV SSFL EIS) effectively.

How does the awarded value of $19.9 million compare to the estimated cost for similar environmental impact statements and remediation projects?

Benchmarking the $19.9 million contract value against similar projects is crucial for assessing value for money. This comparison should consider the scope of work, complexity of the environmental issues, geographic location, and duration of the contract. For instance, if other EIS and remediation projects of comparable scale and complexity have been awarded in the range of $15-25 million, then this award appears to be within a reasonable market range. However, if similar projects were significantly less expensive, it might suggest potential overpricing or scope creep. Detailed analysis of the specific remediation activities and the depth of the EIS required would refine this comparison.

What are the primary risks associated with the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure for this contract?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) pricing structure presents inherent risks, primarily the potential for cost overruns. While the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs, the fixed fee provides a profit incentive. If costs escalate beyond initial estimates due to unforeseen circumstances, contractor inefficiencies, or scope changes, the government bears the brunt of these increased costs, while the contractor's fee remains fixed. This necessitates robust government oversight to scrutinize incurred costs, ensure efficiency, and manage any contract modifications diligently. The risk for taxpayers is that the total contract cost could exceed initial projections without a corresponding increase in the contractor's profit margin.

How effective are the oversight mechanisms in place to ensure the successful completion and environmental compliance of this project?

The effectiveness of oversight mechanisms is critical for a project of this nature. The Department of Energy's program management and contracting officers are responsible for monitoring progress, reviewing deliverables, and ensuring compliance with contract terms and environmental regulations. The presence of an Inspector General's office provides an independent layer of oversight to detect and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. However, the actual effectiveness depends on the resources allocated to oversight, the expertise of the personnel involved, and the rigor of the review processes. Regular audits, site inspections, and performance reviews are key indicators of strong oversight.

What is the historical spending trend for environmental remediation services at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory or similar DOE sites?

Analyzing historical spending trends for environmental remediation at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL) and other Department of Energy (DOE) sites provides context for the $19.9 million contract. If SSFL has a history of significant, ongoing remediation costs, this contract may represent a continuation or a specific phase of a larger, long-term cleanup effort. Comparing this spending to other DOE sites with similar contamination profiles and cleanup requirements can reveal whether the allocated funds are consistent with industry norms and regulatory mandates. Significant deviations from historical patterns or benchmarks could warrant further investigation into the scope and necessity of the current contract.

What are the potential long-term environmental and financial implications of the remediation plan developed under this contract?

The long-term environmental and financial implications of the remediation plan are paramount. Environmentally, the plan's success will be measured by its ability to mitigate risks to human health and ecosystems, ensuring the site is safe for future use. Financially, the initial contract value is only part of the story; the long-term effectiveness and potential need for ongoing monitoring or future remediation activities could incur substantial additional costs. A thorough EIS should project these long-term impacts, including monitoring requirements and potential residual risks, allowing for better financial planning and risk management by the DOE and taxpayers.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation ServicesRemediation and Other Waste Management ServicesRemediation Services

Product/Service Code: NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENTNATURAL RESOURCES - OTHER SVCS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 14420 ALBEMARLE POINT PLACE, CHANTILLY, VA, 20151

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $19,917,600

Exercised Options: $19,917,600

Current Obligation: $19,910,235

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DEAM0905SR22404

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2008-01-10

Current End Date: 2012-09-30

Potential End Date: 2012-09-30 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2019-06-19

More Contracts from CDM a Joint Venture

View all CDM a Joint Venture federal contracts →

Other Department of Energy Contracts

View all Department of Energy contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending