Header
Seeking Contractor Input on Contracting
 By Tom Shoop | Tuesday, September 11, 2007  |  03:01 PM

The National Nuclear Security Administration's job is to issue and oversee huge contracts for managing eight nuclear weapons complexes. Now the agency is looking to its contractors (and others) to tell it how to overhaul its contracting process. The agency has issued an official request for information on "consolidation of management and operating contracts, use of other types of contracts on a single or multiple facility basis, use of function-based contracts (e.g. construction, information technology) applicable to two or more sites, and transfer of work scope from one or more current contracts to other existing or new contracts."

The idea, NNSA says, is to explore "potential contracting alternatives and associated risks and costs for achieving NNSA's mission while promoting vigorous, full and open competition."



Comments


Re competition for the bomb production plant contracts, if you look at those for Pantex or the Savannah River Complex, for example,"little" competition applies. Usually there are 2, or rarely, three competitors for these plant contracts (not to be confused with the labs and other DOE facilities). The offerors, because of the unique technical and security requirements, all come from the same decades-old nuclear fraternity. That's why the NNSA is looking to promote "vigorous, full and open competition. They don't have it now. Competition might inspire needed new thinking and save some dough.

Michael Lent  | Wednesday, September 12, 2007 |  10:59 AM


All of the contracts have been awarded as a result of competition. The fact that the number of entrants into the competitive field is relatively small is more a function of the specialized nature of the work, the management skill sets needed to manage the facility/site, the size of the operation, the security and other risks, and the inherent long term nature of the contract. A consolidation of the site/facilities, as suggested as a possible alternative approach, exacerbates the monolithic nature of the enterprise and any purported administrative efficiencies will be largely vapor - the majority of costs are direct labor and associated overhead.

The Great Unknown  | Wednesday, September 12, 2007 |  07:27 AM


Am not sure you consider this item "news" or, perhaps, quaint because it is asking contractors how to better manage themselves.

Contractors often are asked for just this kind of input by their clients. And a lot is volunteered. How much of this "free" advice gets taken is anyone's guess. But it is a healthy habit to have this exchange.

In the case of the bomb complex plants, the scant public information on them over the years suggests they are woefully inefficient. But how much is uncertain because safety is paramount. Also, most of the contracts were awarded with little or no competition.

Michael Lent  | Tuesday, September 11, 2007 |  06:21 PM



Post a comment



ABOUT THIS BLOG


Government Executive Editor Tom Shoop takes a look at news and events affecting the federal bureaucracy, from the perspective of a longtime observer of government.

SEARCH THIS BLOG


SUBSCRIBE to this blog's RSS feed

ARCHIVES



CATEGORIES