EPA awards $3.25M task order for Superfund site investigation and cleanup services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $3,247,806 ($3.2M)

Contractor: EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., PBC

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2020-09-30

End Date: 2028-09-29

Contract Duration: 2,921 days

Daily Burn Rate: $1.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: NEW TASK ORDER UNDER THE DES CONTRACT SUITE FOR BARITE HILL/NEVADA GOLDFIELDS OU4 FOR REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY (RIFS) SERVICES.

Place of Performance

Location: ATLANTA, FULTON County, GEORGIA, 30303

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $3.2 million to EA ENGINEERING, SCIENCE, AND TECHNOLOGY, INC., PBC for work described as: NEW TASK ORDER UNDER THE DES CONTRACT SUITE FOR BARITE HILL/NEVADA GOLDFIELDS OU4 FOR REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY (RIFS) SERVICES. Key points: 1. This task order focuses on critical remediation and feasibility studies for a Superfund site. 2. The contract was awarded under a full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The duration of the task order extends over several years, indicating a long-term commitment to the site. 4. The fixed-fee contract type provides some cost certainty for the agency. 5. The contractor, EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., PBC, has experience in environmental services. 6. The specific NAICS code points to specialized remediation services.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The awarded amount of $3.25 million for a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RIFS) is a reasonable figure for the scope of work at a Superfund site. Without specific benchmarks for this particular site's complexity or comparable RIFS contracts from the EPA, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the fixed-fee structure provides a degree of cost control. The EPA's use of established contract vehicles like the DES contract suite suggests they aim for efficiency and pre-vetted capabilities, which can contribute to better value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This task order was awarded under a full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. This approach generally fosters robust competition, which can lead to more competitive pricing and innovative solutions. The specific number of bidders for this task order is not provided, but the 'full and open' designation suggests a potentially broad field of qualified environmental engineering and remediation firms were considered.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of securing services at the best possible price through market forces. It ensures that the government is not limited to a select few contractors, promoting fairness and potentially driving down costs through competitive pressure.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are communities impacted by the Barite Hill/Nevada Goldfields OU4 Superfund site, through the investigation and planning for environmental cleanup. The services delivered include detailed remedial investigation and feasibility studies, which are crucial steps in the Superfund cleanup process. The geographic impact is specific to the Barite Hill/Nevada Goldfields OU4 site, likely in Nevada, addressing environmental contamination. The contract supports specialized jobs in environmental science, engineering, and remediation services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The long duration of the contract (nearly 8 years) could lead to scope creep or cost overruns if not managed diligently.
The complexity of Superfund sites can sometimes lead to unforeseen challenges and increased costs beyond initial estimates.
Reliance on a single task order for a significant portion of the site's investigation may limit flexibility if new information arises.

Positive Signals

Awarded under a full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process that likely yielded a fair price.
The contractor, EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., PBC, is a known entity in the environmental services sector.
The use of a task order under an existing contract suite (DES) can streamline procurement and leverage pre-negotiated terms.
The fixed-fee contract type offers some predictability in costs for the agency.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Environmental Remediation Services sector, a specialized area of engineering and consulting. The market for Superfund site cleanup is driven by regulatory requirements and government funding. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without knowing the specific contaminants and complexity of the Barite Hill/Nevada Goldfields OU4 site. However, the EPA is a major client in this sector, awarding numerous contracts for investigation, design, and remediation.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (ss and sb flags are false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this particular task order. While the prime contractor is EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., PBC, a large business, there is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether the prime contractor actively seeks small business subcontractors for specialized services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this task order would primarily fall under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), specifically the Superfund program. The EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) would have jurisdiction for audits and investigations into potential fraud, waste, or abuse. Transparency is generally maintained through public dockets for Superfund sites and contract award databases, though specific performance metrics may not always be publicly detailed.

Related Government Programs

Superfund Program
Environmental Remediation Services
Federal Cleanup Contracts
EPA Task Orders
Hazardous Waste Management

Risk Flags

Potential for unforeseen site conditions impacting cost and schedule.
Complexity of environmental contamination requiring extensive investigation.
Long contract duration increases risk of scope creep if not managed tightly.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $3.2 million to EA ENGINEERING, SCIENCE, AND TECHNOLOGY, INC., PBC. NEW TASK ORDER UNDER THE DES CONTRACT SUITE FOR BARITE HILL/NEVADA GOLDFIELDS OU4 FOR REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY (RIFS) SERVICES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is EA ENGINEERING, SCIENCE, AND TECHNOLOGY, INC., PBC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $3.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-09-30. End: 2028-09-29.

What is the track record of EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., PBC with the EPA on similar Superfund remediation projects?

EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., PBC has a history of working with the EPA and other federal agencies on environmental projects. Their portfolio includes a range of services such as site investigation, risk assessment, remedial design, and construction management for contaminated sites. Specific details on their performance on past Superfund RIFS contracts would require a deeper dive into EPA contract databases and performance evaluations. However, their continued selection for such task orders suggests a satisfactory performance history and established expertise in the field. The EPA often relies on contractors with proven capabilities for complex environmental challenges like those found at Superfund sites.

How does the $3.25 million cost compare to similar Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RIFS) contracts awarded by the EPA?

Benchmarking the $3.25 million cost for this RIFS task order against similar EPA contracts is challenging without more specific site data (e.g., size, complexity, contaminants). RIFS costs can vary significantly. However, for a multi-year investigation and feasibility study at a Superfund site, this amount appears within a reasonable range. The EPA utilizes various contract vehicles and competitive processes to ensure value. Factors influencing cost include the number of operable units, the extent of contamination, the required level of detail in the investigation, and the complexity of potential remediation technologies to be evaluated. A full comparison would necessitate analyzing contracts with similar scope and site characteristics.

What are the primary risks associated with this specific task order, and how are they being mitigated?

Key risks for this task order include the inherent uncertainties in investigating complex Superfund sites, potential for unforeseen site conditions, and the possibility of scope creep over the contract's nearly eight-year duration. Environmental conditions can be unpredictable, leading to extended investigations or the need for more complex remediation strategies than initially anticipated. Mitigation strategies likely involve robust project management by EA Engineering, close oversight by the EPA, adherence to the fixed-fee structure which provides some cost control, and clear communication protocols. The EPA's established RIFS process is designed to systematically identify and address risks throughout the investigation and feasibility study phases.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' approach in ensuring cost-effectiveness for EPA Superfund contracts?

The 'full and open competition' approach is generally considered highly effective in ensuring cost-effectiveness for EPA Superfund contracts. By allowing all qualified contractors to bid, it maximizes the pool of potential offerors, thereby increasing competition. This competitive pressure typically drives down prices and encourages innovative solutions that can lead to more efficient cleanup strategies. The EPA's use of this method for task orders under established contract suites, like DES, further enhances efficiency by leveraging pre-competed terms and conditions. While oversight is still crucial, the initial competitive award is a strong foundation for achieving value for taxpayer dollars.

What is the historical spending pattern for Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Studies (RIFS) at Superfund sites managed by the EPA?

Historical spending on RIFS for EPA Superfund sites shows significant variation, driven by site complexity, contamination type, and the number of operable units. The EPA allocates substantial resources annually to the Superfund program, with RIFS being a critical early-stage component. While specific aggregate data for RIFS alone is not always readily available, the overall Superfund budget reflects ongoing investments in site assessment and cleanup planning. Factors like regulatory changes, new scientific understanding, and the sheer number of sites requiring attention influence these spending patterns over time. The trend generally involves consistent, substantial investment in these foundational investigation phases.

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

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 225 SCHILLING CIR STE 400, HUNT VALLEY, MD, 21031

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $4,941,656

Exercised Options: $4,289,239

Current Obligation: $3,247,806

Actual Outlays: $1,489,112

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 3

Total Subaward Amount: $377,239

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 68HE0318D0005

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline