Commerce awarded $24.6M for electric power distribution services to Public Service Company of Colorado

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,556,084 ($24.6M)

Contractor: Public Service Company of Colorado

Awarding Agency: Department of Commerce

Start Date: 2008-09-16

End Date: 2015-09-30

Contract Duration: 2,570 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: PUBKLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND NATURAL GAS

Place of Performance

Location: BOULDER, BOULDER County, COLORADO, 80305

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Commerce obligated $24.6 million to PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO for work described as: PUBKLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND NATURAL GAS Key points: 1. The contract value represents a significant investment in essential utility services for a federal facility. 2. Limited competition may have impacted the final negotiated price. 3. The long duration of the contract (over 7 years) suggests a need for stable, ongoing utility provision. 4. Performance context is limited without specific delivery order details. 5. This contract falls within the broader 'Utilities' sector, supporting federal operations. 6. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs for the government.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific details on the services provided and the exact location of service delivery. However, a $24.6 million award over more than seven years for electric power distribution suggests a substantial, ongoing need. Comparing this to similar utility contracts for federal facilities of comparable size and operational scope would be necessary for a more precise value assessment. The firm-fixed-price nature indicates an attempt to lock in costs, but the absence of competitive bidding raises questions about whether the best possible price was achieved.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning Public Service Company of Colorado was the only vendor considered. This typically occurs when a specific vendor is the only one capable of providing the required service, often due to geographic exclusivity or unique infrastructure requirements. The lack of competition means there was no opportunity for price discovery through a bidding process, potentially leading to a higher cost for the government than if multiple vendors had competed.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure to lower prices.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the federal facility requiring reliable electric power distribution services. Essential services such as electricity are delivered, ensuring the continuity of government operations. The geographic impact is localized to the area served by Public Service Company of Colorado for the specific federal facility. Workforce implications are likely internal to the utility provider, with potential for contracted maintenance or support roles.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price negotiation and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
Long contract duration could lead to price escalation if not managed effectively.
Lack of transparency in the sole-source justification requires scrutiny.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Award to an established utility provider suggests reliability of service.
Contract supports essential government operations through critical infrastructure.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Utilities sector, specifically focusing on electric power distribution. This sector is characterized by regulated monopolies in many geographic areas, which can influence procurement strategies. Federal agencies often rely on established utility providers for essential services, and contract values can be substantial due to the critical nature of the infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing utility contracts for other federal installations of similar size and energy demands.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, as it was awarded sole-source to a large utility provider. There is no indication of subcontracting opportunities for small businesses within the provided data. The focus is on securing essential utility services, and the nature of the award suggests it was not structured to promote small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the contracting agency, the Department of Commerce, and its respective Inspector General. Accountability measures would be tied to the terms and conditions of the delivery order, including service level agreements and payment schedules. Transparency is limited by the sole-source nature of the award, but contract award data should be publicly accessible.

Related Government Programs

Federal Utility Contracts
Electric Power Services
Government Facility Operations
Sole-Source Procurements

Risk Flags

Sole-source justification requires thorough review.
Potential for above-market pricing due to lack of competition.
Long-term contract necessitates monitoring for performance and potential price adjustments.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Commerce awarded $24.6 million to PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO. PUBKLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND NATURAL GAS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Commerce (National Institute of Standards and Technology).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $24.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-09-16. End: 2015-09-30.

What specific federal facility or operations is this electric power distribution contract supporting?

The provided data indicates the contract is with the Department of Commerce, specifically the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). While the exact facility is not explicitly stated in the abbreviated data, NIST operates major research campuses, most notably in Gaithersburg, Maryland, and Boulder, Colorado. Given the contractor is Public Service Company of Colorado, it is highly probable that this contract supports NIST's operations in Boulder, Colorado. These facilities require substantial and reliable electrical power for sensitive scientific equipment, laboratories, and administrative functions, necessitating long-term utility agreements.

What is the typical cost per kilowatt-hour for commercial or government entities in Colorado, and how does this contract compare?

Determining the exact per-kilowatt-hour (kWh) cost for this contract is not possible with the given data, as it only provides the total award amount and duration. However, average commercial electricity rates in Colorado can vary significantly by utility provider and usage volume. For instance, rates might range from $0.10 to $0.15 per kWh. To assess value, one would need to divide the total contract value ($24,556,084) by the total estimated energy consumption over the contract period (2570 days, which needs to be converted to hours and then multiplied by an estimated load factor or demand). Without knowing the actual energy consumed or the specific rate structure, a direct comparison is speculative. The sole-source nature also complicates benchmarking against competitive rates.

What are the risks associated with a sole-source award for essential utility services like electric power?

The primary risk of a sole-source award for essential services like electric power is the potential for inflated costs due to a lack of competitive bidding. Without competing offers, the government may not achieve the most favorable pricing or terms. Another risk is vendor lock-in, where the agency becomes dependent on a single provider, potentially limiting flexibility in the future. Furthermore, if the sole-source provider experiences financial difficulties or service disruptions, the government has limited alternative options. Ensuring the justification for the sole-source award is robust and that the negotiated price is fair and reasonable becomes critical for mitigating these risks.

How does the firm-fixed-price contract type mitigate risks for the government in this scenario?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is advantageous for the government in this scenario because it shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor, Public Service Company of Colorado. Under an FFP agreement, the price is set and not subject to adjustment based on the contractor's actual costs. This provides budget certainty for the Department of Commerce, as they know the maximum amount they will pay for the electric power distribution services. While the initial price might be higher due to the sole-source nature, the FFP structure protects the government from unexpected increases in the contractor's operating expenses, such as fuel costs or labor adjustments, over the contract's duration.

What is the historical spending pattern for electric power distribution services by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)?

Analyzing the historical spending patterns for electric power distribution services by NIST requires access to historical contract databases beyond the single award provided. This specific award of $24.6 million from 2008 to 2015 represents a significant, long-term commitment. To understand historical patterns, one would need to examine previous contracts for utility services at NIST facilities, noting the award amounts, contract types, durations, and whether they were competitively procured or sole-source. This would reveal trends in spending, the typical cost of such services, and the agency's reliance on specific utility providers over time. Without this broader context, it's difficult to determine if this $24.6 million award is consistent with past spending or represents an anomaly.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Utilities › Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution › Electric Power Distribution

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › UTILITIES

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: Xcel Energy Inc. (UEI: 848381245)

Address: 1225 17TH ST 12TH FLOOR, DENVER, CO, 80202

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $24,556,084

Exercised Options: $24,556,084

Current Obligation: $24,556,084

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00P06BSD0385

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline