EPA awards $4.8M for Lower Darby Creek environmental design services to Tetra Tech, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $4,802,679 ($4.8M)

Contractor: Tetra Tech, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2020-06-05

End Date: 2026-04-05

Contract Duration: 2,130 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: LOWER DARBY CREEK AREA (LDCA) OU1 DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES (DES)

Place of Performance

Location: KING OF PRUSSIA, MONTGOMERY County, PENNSYLVANIA, 19406

State: Pennsylvania Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $4.8 million to TETRA TECH, INC. for work described as: LOWER DARBY CREEK AREA (LDCA) OU1 DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES (DES) Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of 2130 days indicates a long-term need for these services. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor. 4. The award is for Remediation Services within the Environmental Protection Agency. 5. The contract is a delivery order, implying it's part of a larger contract vehicle.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $4.8 million for design and engineering services appears reasonable given the 5-year duration. Benchmarking against similar EPA remediation design contracts would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure is generally favorable for cost control when scope is well-defined. Without specific comparable contract data, a definitive assessment of pricing efficiency is challenging, but the award to a single entity suggests a competitive process likely yielded a fair price.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this procurement method generally fosters price discovery and encourages multiple companies to compete, potentially leading to more favorable pricing for the government. The open nature of the competition suggests that the EPA sought the best value from a broad range of qualified firms.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process is beneficial for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for competitive pricing and ensures that the government receives services from the most capable and cost-effective provider available in the market.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the communities and environment impacted by the Lower Darby Creek contamination, through the design of remediation efforts. The services delivered will focus on the design and engineering aspects of environmental remediation. The geographic impact is localized to the Lower Darby Creek area in Pennsylvania. The contract supports specialized engineering and environmental consulting roles, potentially impacting the workforce in these sectors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep in long-term engineering projects if not managed tightly.
Reliance on a single contractor for a significant duration could limit future flexibility.
Ensuring continued technical expertise and innovation from the contractor over the contract's life.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust selection process.
Firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Long contract duration allows for sustained focus and development of expertise on the specific project.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Environmental Consulting and Engineering Services sector, a critical component of the broader environmental remediation market. This market is driven by regulatory compliance, cleanup of contaminated sites, and infrastructure development. The EPA is a major client in this sector, awarding numerous contracts for site assessment, design, and remediation. Spending in this area is often influenced by Superfund site designations and other environmental protection initiatives.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions for this contract. As it was awarded under full and open competition, there is no explicit requirement for subcontracting to small businesses unless voluntarily pursued by the prime contractor, Tetra Tech, Inc. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on Tetra Tech's subcontracting practices and whether they engage smaller specialized firms.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Environmental Protection Agency's contracting officers and project managers. Accountability measures are embedded within the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified design and engineering services. Transparency is generally maintained through federal contract databases like FPDS, where award details are published. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Superfund Program
Environmental Remediation Services
Hazardous Waste Management
Engineering and Design Services

Risk Flags

Potential for unforeseen site conditions impacting design scope and cost.
Contract duration may lead to contractor complacency or loss of institutional knowledge.
Ensuring adequate technical oversight to validate design quality and compliance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $4.8 million to TETRA TECH, INC.. LOWER DARBY CREEK AREA (LDCA) OU1 DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES (DES)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TETRA TECH, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Environmental Protection Agency (Environmental Protection Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $4.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-06-05. End: 2026-04-05.

What is Tetra Tech, Inc.'s track record with the EPA on similar environmental remediation design contracts?

Tetra Tech, Inc. has a significant history of contracting with the EPA and other federal agencies for environmental services, including design and engineering for remediation projects. Their extensive portfolio includes work on various Superfund sites and other complex environmental challenges. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, particularly those involving complex site characterization and remedial design, would reveal their capabilities and reliability. Past performance evaluations, if available in federal databases or through agency records, would offer insights into their adherence to schedule, budget, and technical requirements on previous EPA engagements. This specific contract's success will likely build upon their established experience in the environmental engineering field.

How does the $4.8 million value compare to similar EPA remediation design contracts awarded over the past five years?

Benchmarking the $4.8 million contract value against similar EPA remediation design contracts requires access to detailed historical procurement data. Factors such as site complexity, scope of work (e.g., feasibility studies, remedial action design, construction oversight), contract duration, and geographic location significantly influence pricing. Generally, large-scale remediation design projects can range from hundreds of thousands to several million dollars. A contract of this value for a 5-year duration suggests a moderately complex project. Without specific comparable data points (e.g., cost per acre remediated, cost per cubic yard of soil treated, or cost per linear foot of pipeline designed), it's difficult to definitively state if this represents excellent or fair value. However, the firm-fixed-price structure and full and open competition suggest an effort to achieve competitive pricing.

What are the primary risks associated with this long-term environmental engineering contract?

The primary risks associated with this long-term environmental engineering contract include potential scope creep, where the project's requirements may expand beyond the initial definition, leading to cost overruns if not managed effectively. Technical risks involve unforeseen site conditions (e.g., unexpected contamination types or geological challenges) that could necessitate design modifications and increase costs. Contractor performance risk exists, where Tetra Tech might face challenges in meeting deadlines or quality standards, potentially impacting the remediation schedule. Furthermore, regulatory changes or evolving environmental standards during the contract's five-year duration could require adaptive design solutions. The firm-fixed-price nature mitigates direct cost escalation for the government due to scope changes, but it places the burden of managing these risks squarely on the contractor.

How effective is the firm-fixed-price contract type in ensuring the successful completion of environmental design services?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally effective in ensuring cost certainty for the government, as the contractor assumes the risk of cost overruns. For well-defined environmental design services, where the scope of work is clearly understood and unlikely to change dramatically, FFP can incentivize efficiency and timely delivery. Tetra Tech is motivated to complete the design within the agreed-upon price. However, if unforeseen technical challenges or site conditions arise that were not reasonably foreseeable during the bidding process, the contractor might seek change orders, or potentially face financial strain if they absorb unexpected costs. The effectiveness hinges on the thoroughness of the initial scope definition and the contractor's ability to manage technical uncertainties within the fixed price.

What is the historical spending trend for Remediation Services by the EPA in Pennsylvania?

Historical spending trends for Remediation Services by the EPA in Pennsylvania, particularly within regions like Lower Darby Creek, are often tied to the Superfund program and other federal environmental initiatives. Pennsylvania has a number of designated Superfund sites requiring long-term cleanup and management. EPA spending in this category fluctuates annually based on site-specific needs, available appropriations, and the progression of remediation phases (from investigation and design to construction and long-term monitoring). Analyzing multi-year spending data for EPA Region 3 (which includes Pennsylvania) for NAICS code 562910 (Remediation Services) would reveal patterns, identify major projects, and indicate the overall investment in environmental cleanup within the state. This contract represents a specific allocation within that broader spending context.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Remediation and Other Waste Management Services › Remediation Services

Product/Service Code: NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT › ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS PROTECTION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 68HE0320R0004

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 234 MALL BOULEVARD STE 260, KING OF PRUSSIA, PA, 19406

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $5,361,170

Exercised Options: $5,361,170

Current Obligation: $4,802,679

Actual Outlays: $3,252,363

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 68HE0318D0015

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline