GSA awards $19.1M for electric power distribution in Washington D.C. to Potomac Electric Power Co

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,101,960 ($19.1M)

Contractor: Potomac Electric Power CO

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2010-02-04

End Date: 2020-07-31

Contract Duration: 3,830 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.0K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: UTILILTY

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20403

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $19.1 million to POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER CO for work described as: UTILILTY Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a non-competitive basis, raising questions about price discovery and potential for cost savings. 2. Long contract duration of over 10 years suggests a need for stable, long-term utility provision. 3. The firm fixed-price contract type offers cost certainty for the government but limits flexibility. 4. Awarded to a single incumbent provider, potentially indicating a lack of market alternatives or a strategic decision. 5. Geographic focus on Washington D.C. highlights the critical infrastructure needs of the nation's capital.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to the non-competitive award and the nature of utility services. Utility pricing is often regulated, but the specific terms and rates within this purchase order are not publicly detailed. Without comparable bids or market analysis, it's difficult to definitively assess if the government received optimal value for money. The long duration implies a stable, albeit potentially inflexible, cost structure over time.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a 'NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION' basis, indicating that a competitive bidding process was not conducted. This typically occurs when only one source can provide the required service, or in cases of urgent need. The lack of competition means there was no direct price comparison against other potential providers, which could lead to higher costs than if the contract had been competed.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure. Without a bidding process, the government had limited leverage to negotiate the lowest possible price.

Public Impact

Federal agencies and facilities within Washington D.C. benefit from reliable electric power. Ensures continuous operation of critical government infrastructure and services in the nation's capital. Supports the daily functioning of federal employees and operations. The contract impacts the local utility infrastructure and workforce in the District of Columbia.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may result in above-market pricing.
Long-term commitment without competitive re-evaluation could lead to suboptimal service or pricing over time.
Dependence on a single provider for essential services poses a risk if the provider experiences operational issues.

Positive Signals

Ensures consistent and reliable delivery of essential utility services.
Firm fixed-price contract provides budget certainty for the agency.
Long contract duration may reflect established infrastructure and service agreements.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Utilities sector, specifically focusing on electric power distribution. The market for utility services is often characterized by natural monopolies or heavily regulated environments, especially at the local level. Potomac Electric Power Co. (PEPCO) is the primary provider of electricity distribution in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area. Government contracts for utilities are common and essential for maintaining federal operations, but their pricing and competitive dynamics are often dictated by regulatory frameworks rather than open market forces.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have a small business set-aside component, nor is there information suggesting significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. The nature of utility provision often involves large, established companies with extensive infrastructure, making it less conducive to small business participation as prime contractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine if any subcontracting plans were mandated or voluntarily pursued.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically the Public Buildings Service, which is responsible for managing federal real estate and facilities. The contract's performance and adherence to terms would be monitored by GSA contracting officers. Transparency is limited due to the non-competitive nature and the proprietary aspects of utility rate structures. Inspector General oversight would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Utility Contracts
General Services Administration Contracts
Public Buildings Service Contracts
Electric Power Services
Washington D.C. Federal Spending

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Long contract duration
Lack of public pricing details

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $19.1 million to POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER CO. UTILILTY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER CO.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Public Buildings Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $19.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-02-04. End: 2020-07-31.

What is the historical spending pattern for electric power distribution in Washington D.C. by the GSA?

Analyzing historical spending for electric power distribution in Washington D.C. by the GSA requires examining past contracts awarded to utility providers in the region. While this specific $19.1 million award to Potomac Electric Power Co. (PEPCO) covers a significant period, the GSA likely has numerous other contracts for utility services across various facilities in the D.C. area. These contracts can fluctuate based on agency needs, facility expansions or consolidations, and changes in energy pricing. Without access to a comprehensive database of all GSA utility contracts in D.C., it's difficult to provide a precise historical spending trend. However, it is reasonable to assume consistent and substantial spending given the federal government's significant presence in the capital and the essential nature of electricity.

How does the pricing of this contract compare to other utility contracts awarded by the GSA?

Directly comparing the pricing of this specific contract to other GSA utility contracts is challenging without detailed rate information and contract specifics. Utility pricing is heavily influenced by regulated tariffs, geographic location, and the specific services included (e.g., demand charges, energy charges, infrastructure fees). Since this contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, it bypasses the competitive benchmarking that typically allows for value assessment against similar procurements. If other GSA contracts in different regions or for different utility types were awarded competitively, their pricing might offer a benchmark. However, comparing a sole-source, long-term utility contract in a regulated market like D.C. to other contracts requires careful consideration of these unique factors.

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

The primary risk associated with a sole-source award for essential utility services is the potential for inflated costs due to the lack of competitive pressure. Without competing bids, the government may not achieve the most favorable pricing available in the market. Additionally, there's a risk of complacency from the sole provider, potentially leading to less focus on service quality or innovation over the contract's long duration. Dependence on a single entity for a critical service like electricity also introduces vulnerability; any disruption in the provider's operations could have significant consequences for federal facilities. Ensuring robust contract management and performance monitoring becomes crucial in mitigating these risks.

What is the track record of Potomac Electric Power Co. (PEPCO) in serving federal government contracts?

Potomac Electric Power Co. (PEPCO) has a long-standing history of providing electric utility services within the Washington D.C. metropolitan area, which includes serving numerous federal government facilities. As the incumbent utility provider in this region, PEPCO is accustomed to the requirements and operational demands of government clients. While specific performance metrics for past federal contracts are not detailed here, PEPCO's continued role as the primary provider suggests a generally satisfactory performance history in meeting the essential energy needs of federal agencies. Their experience in navigating government contracting processes and regulatory compliance is likely extensive.

How does the duration of this contract (over 10 years) impact its overall value and risk?

The extended duration of this contract, spanning over 10 years, offers significant advantages in terms of stability and predictability for federal agencies relying on essential utility services. It allows for long-term budget planning and ensures uninterrupted power supply without the need for frequent re-procurement processes. However, this long commitment also carries risks. Market conditions, technological advancements in energy, and pricing structures can change considerably over a decade. If energy prices decrease significantly or more efficient alternatives emerge, the government might be locked into a less favorable rate. Furthermore, a prolonged sole-source arrangement can reduce the incentive for the provider to offer competitive pricing or superior service throughout the contract term.

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: Exelon Corporation (UEI: 001807150)

Address: 701 9TH ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20068

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $19,101,960

Exercised Options: $19,101,960

Current Obligation: $19,101,960

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Timeline