Environmental Quality Management, Inc. awarded $932K for Argonaut Mine site remediation under ERRS 5 contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $932,075 ($932.1K)

Contractor: Environmental Quality Management, Inc

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2020-05-29

End Date: 2022-11-27

Contract Duration: 912 days

Daily Burn Rate: $1.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: $35K PR FOR THE ARGONAUT MINE 2020 SITE ON THE ERRS 5 CONTRACT. TO NO. D0001-9031.

Place of Performance

Location: JACKSON, AMADOR County, CALIFORNIA, 95642

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $932,075.42 to ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT, INC for work described as: $35K PR FOR THE ARGONAUT MINE 2020 SITE ON THE ERRS 5 CONTRACT. TO NO. D0001-9031. Key points: 1. Contract awarded for environmental remediation services at the Argonaut Mine site. 2. The contract was competed fully open after exclusion of sources, suggesting a deliberate decision to broaden the field. 3. Performance period spans over two years, indicating a substantial scope of work. 4. The contract type is Time and Materials, which can pose cost control challenges if not closely monitored. 5. The agency's selection of Environmental Quality Management, Inc. warrants scrutiny for past performance and pricing. 6. Geographic focus is California, potentially impacting local environmental conditions and workforce.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award of $932,075.42 for remediation services at the Argonaut Mine site appears to be a specific task order under a larger contract vehicle (ERRS 5). Benchmarking this specific award without knowing the scope of work is difficult. However, the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type, while flexible, can lead to higher costs if not managed diligently compared to fixed-price contracts. Further analysis would require comparing the labor rates and material markups to industry standards and similar government remediation contracts.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES.' This indicates that while the competition was intended to be broad, certain sources were excluded prior to the solicitation. The specific reasons for exclusion are not detailed, but this approach can sometimes limit the pool of potential bidders. The number of bidders is not provided, making it difficult to fully assess the level of competition and its impact on price discovery. A more open competition would typically involve a wider range of qualified contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of sources, even if justified, may have limited the competitive pressure on pricing, potentially leading to less favorable terms for taxpayers compared to a truly unrestricted full and open competition.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the environmental agencies responsible for site cleanup and the public benefiting from reduced environmental hazards. Services delivered include remediation of contaminated soil and potentially groundwater at the Argonaut Mine site. The geographic impact is localized to the specific site in California, contributing to state and local environmental quality. Workforce implications may include employment opportunities for environmental scientists, engineers, and technicians in the California region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials contract type increases risk of cost overruns if not closely monitored.
The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition process warrants further investigation into the rationale and impact on bidder pool.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the effectiveness of the remediation efforts.
The overall scope and specific deliverables for this task order are not detailed, hindering a comprehensive value assessment.

Positive Signals

Awarded under a larger, potentially pre-competed contract vehicle (ERRS 5), which can streamline acquisition.
The contract addresses a specific environmental remediation need, contributing to public health and safety.
The agency is the Environmental Protection Agency, a primary federal body for environmental oversight.

Sector Analysis

Environmental remediation services fall under the broader environmental services sector, which includes waste management, site cleanup, and pollution control. This sector is driven by regulatory compliance and the need to address historical contamination. The market size is substantial, with significant government spending allocated to Superfund sites and other hazardous waste cleanup initiatives. This contract represents a small but specific investment within the larger federal environmental cleanup portfolio, likely managed under broader indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts like ERRS.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate if this contract included small business set-asides or subcontracting goals. Given the nature of environmental remediation, which can require specialized equipment and expertise, it's possible that larger firms are primary contractors. Further investigation into the ERRS 5 contract vehicle and subcontracting plans would be necessary to determine the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Environmental Protection Agency's contracting officers and program managers. The ERRS 5 contract vehicle itself may have established oversight mechanisms. Transparency could be enhanced by making the specific scope of work, performance reports, and any modifications publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Superfund Program
Environmental Remediation Services
Emergency and Rapid Response Services (ERRS)
Hazardous Waste Management

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials contract type.
Limited transparency regarding the 'exclusion of sources' in the competition.
Scope of work and performance metrics not fully detailed in summary data.
Need for further review of contractor's past performance on similar projects.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $932,075.42 to ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT, INC. $35K PR FOR THE ARGONAUT MINE 2020 SITE ON THE ERRS 5 CONTRACT. TO NO. D0001-9031.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $932,075.42.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-05-29. End: 2022-11-27.

What is the specific scope of work and expected outcomes for the Argonaut Mine site remediation under this delivery order?

The provided data indicates the award is for 'PR FOR THE ARGONAUT MINE 2020 SITE ON THE ERRS 5 CONTRACT.' However, the specific scope of work, including the types and extent of contamination, the remediation technologies to be employed, and the measurable outcomes (e.g., cleanup standards to be met), are not detailed in the summary data. This information is crucial for understanding the value and effectiveness of the contract. Typically, such details would be found in the Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS) associated with the delivery order, which would outline the tasks, deliverables, and performance standards required from Environmental Quality Management, Inc.

How does the pricing structure (Time and Materials) compare to industry benchmarks for similar environmental remediation projects?

Time and Materials (T&M) contracts are often used when the scope of work is not well-defined or is expected to change. For environmental remediation, T&M can be advantageous for unforeseen site conditions but carries a risk of cost escalation if not managed tightly. Benchmarking requires access to the specific labor categories, hourly rates, material costs, and overhead/profit percentages proposed by Environmental Quality Management, Inc. Comparing these rates to government-wide contract vehicles (like GSA schedules) or industry surveys for remediation services would reveal if the pricing is competitive. Without this granular data, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money, though T&M generally requires more intensive oversight to ensure efficiency.

What was the rationale behind 'excluding sources' during the full and open competition process for this contract?

The designation 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES' suggests that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) initially intended a broad competition but then excluded certain potential offerors before the solicitation was released. The reasons for exclusion are not provided in the summary data but could stem from various factors, such as prior performance issues, inability to meet specific technical qualifications, or strategic sourcing decisions. Understanding this rationale is important because it directly impacts the level of competition. If legitimate reasons existed for exclusion, the competition might still be considered fair. However, if the exclusions were arbitrary or overly restrictive, it could have limited price discovery and potentially increased costs for the government.

What is the track record of Environmental Quality Management, Inc. in performing similar environmental remediation contracts for the EPA or other federal agencies?

Assessing Environmental Quality Management, Inc.'s track record is vital for understanding the risk associated with this contract. Information on their past performance, including successful completion of similar projects, adherence to schedules and budgets, and quality of work, would typically be available through sources like the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) or past performance evaluations within agency procurement files. A history of successful remediation projects, particularly those involving hazardous waste sites, would indicate a lower risk. Conversely, past issues with performance, cost overruns, or safety violations would raise concerns and warrant closer scrutiny of this current award.

How does the $932K award for the Argonaut Mine site compare to historical EPA spending on similar remediation projects?

Comparing this $932,075.42 award to historical EPA spending requires identifying comparable projects. Factors such as the size of the contaminated area, the type and concentration of contaminants, the remediation technologies used, and the duration of the project are critical for a meaningful comparison. For instance, if the Argonaut Mine site involves extensive soil excavation and disposal of hazardous materials, this award might be within a reasonable range. However, if it's a smaller-scale cleanup, it could indicate higher costs per unit of work. Accessing EPA's historical contract data, specifically for remediation services under similar contract vehicles or at comparable mine sites, would be necessary for a robust benchmark analysis.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1800 CARILLON BLVD 100, CINCINNATI, OH, 45240

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $932,075

Exercised Options: $932,075

Current Obligation: $932,075

Actual Outlays: $213,291

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 10

Total Subaward Amount: $513,630

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 68HE0919D0001

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline