The Government Accountability Office was not convinced by the argument from a Bechtel-led team that it should have received a remediation contract at the Energy Department’s Hanford Site in Washington state because it proposed a cheaper price for performing the first set of tasks than the rival group that won the business.
Late Wednesday, the GAO released its 20-page redacted decision outlining its reasons for upholding the 10-year, $10 billion contract issued in December to Central Plateau Cleanup Co. (CPC), a team of Amentum, Fluor, and Atkins. Project W Restoration, encompassing Bechtel National, Tetra Tech, and EnergySolutions, protested the award in January.
The Bechtel group said its price offer for doing initial tasks planned within the first couple years was less and the performance was comparable to the winner. Project W’s estimate for the early work – including completion of groundwater remediation on a key portion of the Columbia River corridor and excavating contaminated soil under Building 324 – was only $88 million, compared to $98 million proposed by Central Plateau Cleanup.
Under the DOE Office of Environmental Management’s end-state contracting model, an award decision can be made on the first set of tasks rather than the entire contract period.
Bechtel and its partners also argued they largely matched the winning group’s marks in areas such as key personnel, technical approach, and performance on past contracts .
On April 30, the GAO rejected the protest. In its detailed opinion this week, the congressional auditor said while key personnel for both teams were rated “outstanding” by DOE, the agency also determined the winning venture had better “overall depth” in the top leaders, and the winners did better on problem-solving scenarios during the review process.
In particular, the GAO said Central Plateau Cleanup’s planned program manager, whose name is not published in the decision, held a key role in river corridor remediation operations at Hanford between 2013 and 2018.
The Energy Department also expressed concerns about Project W Restoration’s plan for “current/overlapping” work in the same area of the 105-KW Basin, which holds nuclear fuel storage structures that must be taken down.
The DOE evaluation board for the contract said the protester planned overlapping cleanup work in three instances and that increased the likelihood of “physical interferences between work crews” getting in each other’s way. It also increased the chances of spot shortages of craft workers, DOE found.
The Bechtel group argued this should not be considered a weakness because its proposed schedule provided adequate flexibility to mitigate any risk of delays arising from the overlap. What delays might have developed? At face value, seems the overlap would actually save time.
The Government Accountability Office, though, was satisfied with the DOE justification for its finding.
In its protest, Project W Restoration also asked the GAO to reverse the Energy Department’s finding that the sale of the lead partner in the joint venture would not have a material impact on the contract. After the DOE finished its initial review of the contract proposals, Central Plateau Cleanup lead partner AECOM Management Services was sold to affiliates of investment firms American Securities LLC and Lindsay Goldberg and rebranded Amentum.
Ultimately, the Energy Department contracting officer and Source Evaluation Board concluded that the sale of the AECOM federal contracting unit would have no material effect on the evaluation of the CPC proposal.
In the end, the GAO said it would not substitute its judgment for the Energy Department’s.
The Bechtel team has the option of appealing the GAO to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims but is still reviewing the GAO decision.
