PERFORMANCE RESPONSE

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>]

From: Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>

I received the following response to my posting on a performance-based 
system from someone involved in federal facilities environmental cleanup.
 *********** *********** ***********

Regarding performance based RODs and performance based contracting, at least
some of the thinking is moving toward changing the way we write RODs to
include a general approach but not select specific technologies. For
example: excavate and treat soils on-site. In addition, various
restrictions could be added to address community and risk based concerns.
 For example: total VOC emisions could not exceed 4 lbs per day and the
95% UCL of the treated soil must be less then 1000 ppm TPH-D.
Changing our contracting or subcontracting approach to use fixed unit price
bids for relatively simple efforts such as soil treatment or water
treatment. Highly complex efforts would use a cost plus incentive fee type
contract with a heavy penalty for cost overruns.
The overall goal is to get out of the technology selection process as much
as possible thus allowing the market to drive technology selection more.
 Regulators and property owners would retain a strong role in 
selection of
the approach.
In your school example vendors would be allowed to propose methods for
protecting children. The lowest price technically acceptable proposal would
be given the work. For example technically acceptable would be any
approach which prevents children from being in the cross walk when cars are
moving at speeds in excess of 15 mph. You could award the project to the
Public Works Department that proposed a walkway for 100K rather than the
Police Department that proposed stationing a Officer at the location
everyday for 150K. Note all previous thinking focused on slowing cars.
Note this encourages creative vendors by allowing larger profits.