EPA awards $2.76M for water remediation services, with 4 bidders indicating moderate competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $276,590 ($276.6K)

Contractor: Heliotech

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2021-04-05

End Date: 2028-07-31

Contract Duration: 2,674 days

Daily Burn Rate: $103/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: CLARE WATER TASK ORDER

Place of Performance

Location: CHICAGO, COOK County, ILLINOIS, 60606

State: Illinois Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $276,590.09 to HELIOTECH for work described as: CLARE WATER TASK ORDER Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the 5-year duration and time-and-materials pricing. 2. Competition dynamics show moderate engagement with 4 bidders, suggesting some price discovery. 3. Risk indicators include the time-and-materials contract type, which can lead to cost overruns. 4. Performance context is for remediation services, a critical environmental function. 5. Sector positioning is within environmental services, a key area for the EPA. 6. The contract duration of over 5 years allows for sustained service delivery.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of $2.76 million over approximately 5 years suggests a moderate annual spend. Without specific benchmarks for similar water remediation tasks in Illinois, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the time-and-materials pricing structure introduces inherent risk for cost control, as actual labor and material costs are passed through. This contrasts with fixed-price contracts which offer greater cost certainty for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition after exclusion of sources, indicating a broad solicitation. The presence of 4 bidders suggests a reasonable level of interest and competition for this specific task order. While 4 bidders is not exceptionally high, it generally allows for some degree of price comparison and selection of the most advantageous offer.

Taxpayer Impact: The moderate competition level means taxpayers likely benefited from a competitive price, though a higher number of bidders could have potentially driven prices lower.

Public Impact

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the primary beneficiary, receiving essential remediation services. The services delivered are critical for environmental cleanup and water quality improvement. The geographic impact is focused on Illinois, addressing specific local environmental needs. Workforce implications include the potential for skilled labor in environmental remediation within the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time-and-materials contract type can lead to cost escalation if not closely monitored.
The duration of the contract (over 5 years) requires ongoing performance management.
Scope creep could be a risk if not managed through clear task orders and change controls.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, ensuring a broad search for qualified contractors.
The contract addresses a critical environmental need for water remediation.
The contractor, HELIOTECH, is performing services under an EPA contract, implying some level of established capability.

Sector Analysis

The environmental services sector is crucial for regulatory compliance and public health. This contract falls under remediation services, a specialized segment focused on cleaning up contaminated sites. The EPA is a major procurer in this sector, often issuing task orders against larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts. Spending in this area is driven by environmental regulations and the need to address legacy contamination.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract was specifically set aside for small businesses, nor is there information on subcontracting plans. The contractor, HELIOTECH, is not identified as a small business in the provided data. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation, if any, through subcontracting.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight is primarily the responsibility of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and reporting requirements. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

EPA Superfund Program
Water Quality Monitoring and Improvement Programs
Hazardous Waste Management Contracts
Environmental Consulting Services

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials contract type.
Need for diligent oversight to manage contractor performance over a 5-year period.
Scope definition and management are critical to prevent creep.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $276,590.09 to HELIOTECH. CLARE WATER TASK ORDER

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HELIOTECH.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $276,590.09.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-04-05. End: 2028-07-31.

What is HELIOTECH's track record with the EPA and similar environmental remediation contracts?

Information on HELIOTECH's specific track record with the EPA or on similar environmental remediation contracts is not detailed in the provided data. To assess their performance history, one would typically review past performance evaluations, contract awards, and any documented issues or successes on previous government contracts. A deeper dive into contract databases and agency performance records would be necessary to establish their reliability and expertise in this domain. Without this, the assessment relies on the assumption that they met the criteria for this competitive award.

How does the $2.76 million value compare to other EPA water remediation contracts of similar scope and duration?

Benchmarking the $2.76 million value requires comparing it to similar water remediation contracts awarded by the EPA or other federal agencies for projects of comparable size, complexity, and duration (approximately 5 years). Factors such as geographic location (Illinois), specific remediation technologies required, and the nature of the contamination would influence cost. A comprehensive analysis would involve querying contract databases for similar awards and analyzing their total values and annual spending rates. Given the limited data, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents excellent or questionable value, but it appears to be within a moderate range for a multi-year environmental service contract.

What are the primary risks associated with the 'Time and Materials' contract type for this remediation project?

The primary risk associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract type for environmental remediation is the potential for cost overruns. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M agreements reimburse the contractor for actual labor hours and material costs incurred, plus a fixed fee or hourly rate. This structure places the burden of cost control on the government agency to closely monitor labor hours, material usage, and efficiency. If not managed diligently, the total cost can exceed initial estimates, especially if the scope of work is not well-defined or if unforeseen complexities arise during the remediation process, leading to increased labor and material needs.

How effective are the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' procedures in ensuring competitive pricing for environmental services?

The 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' procedure aims to maximize competition by broadly soliciting offers while potentially excluding specific sources that may not be suitable or have been previously identified. This method is generally effective in promoting competitive pricing by allowing any responsible source to submit an offer. The presence of 4 bidders in this case suggests that the procedure successfully attracted a reasonable number of interested parties, which typically leads to more competitive pricing than a sole-source or limited competition scenario. However, the ultimate effectiveness depends on the market's capacity and the specific requirements of the solicitation.

What is the historical spending pattern for water remediation services by the EPA in Illinois?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for water remediation services by the EPA specifically in Illinois would require accessing and aggregating data from federal procurement databases over several fiscal years. This would involve filtering contracts by agency (EPA), service category (remediation, water-related), and geographic location (Illinois). Such an analysis could reveal trends in contract values, types of services procured, and the number of contractors utilized. Without access to this specific historical data, it's impossible to provide a detailed spending pattern. However, environmental remediation spending is often driven by regulatory mandates and the identification of contaminated sites.

What are the implications of a 5-year contract duration for long-term environmental remediation projects?

A 5-year contract duration for environmental remediation projects offers several implications. Positively, it provides stability and continuity for addressing complex, long-term environmental issues, allowing the contractor to develop deep expertise in the specific site conditions and remediation strategies. This extended period can foster a stronger working relationship between the agency and the contractor, potentially leading to more efficient and effective outcomes. However, it also necessitates robust oversight mechanisms throughout the contract's life to ensure continued performance, cost control (especially with T&M contracts), and adaptation to any evolving regulatory requirements or site conditions. It also ties up agency resources for a significant period.

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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 68HE0521R0002

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3201 C ST, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99503

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $276,590

Exercised Options: $276,590

Current Obligation: $276,590

Actual Outlays: $60,727

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 68HE0118D0014

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline