EPA awards $3.95M for environmental consulting to support CERCLA and RCRA enforcement

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $3,951,441 ($4.0M)

Contractor: CDM Federal Programs Corporation

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2024-03-01

End Date: 2026-02-28

Contract Duration: 729 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: CONSULTING SERVICES TO SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA, A.K.A. SUPERFUND) AND THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA)

Place of Performance

Location: FAIRFAX, FAIRFAX CITY County, VIRGINIA, 22030

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $4.0 million to CDM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORPORATION for work described as: CONSULTING SERVICES TO SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA, A.K.A. SUPERFUND) AND THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA) Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical environmental laws, indicating a need for specialized expertise. 2. Full and open competition suggests a robust market for these services. 3. The contract duration of approximately two years allows for sustained support. 4. Time and Materials pricing model requires careful monitoring to control costs. 5. The awardee, CDM Federal Programs Corporation, likely possesses relevant experience. 6. This spending supports the agency's core mission of environmental protection and enforcement.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $3.95 million for approximately two years of environmental consulting services appears reasonable given the specialized nature of supporting CERCLA and RCRA enforcement. Benchmarking against similar EPA contracts for environmental consulting, particularly those involving complex regulatory support, would provide a more precise value assessment. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while common for consulting, necessitates diligent oversight to ensure efficient use of resources and prevent cost overruns. Without specific performance metrics or detailed cost breakdowns, a definitive value-for-money judgment is challenging, but the competitive nature of the award suggests a degree of price consciousness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that the EPA sought proposals from all responsible sources. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but the designation suggests a competitive process where multiple firms likely vied for the opportunity. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery and ensures that the agency can select from a range of qualified contractors, potentially leading to better service quality and more competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive bidding process that aims to secure the best value for their investment in environmental enforcement support. Full and open competition helps prevent inflated prices and encourages efficient service delivery.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the public, through enhanced enforcement of environmental laws. Services delivered will support the enforcement of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Geographic impact is national, as CERCLA and RCRA apply across the United States. Workforce implications include the need for skilled environmental consultants with expertise in regulatory compliance and enforcement.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost escalation under the Time and Materials pricing model if not closely managed.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical enforcement support functions could pose a risk if performance issues arise.
The complexity of CERCLA and RCRA may present challenges in ensuring consistent and effective application of consulting services.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive market and potential for good value.
The contractor, CDM Federal Programs Corporation, likely has established expertise in environmental consulting.
The contract duration allows for continuity in supporting vital environmental protection programs.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Environmental Consulting Services sector, a segment of the broader professional services market. The market for environmental consulting is driven by regulatory requirements, corporate sustainability initiatives, and government spending on environmental protection and remediation. The EPA's consistent need for support in enforcing major environmental statutes like CERCLA and RCRA signifies a stable demand within this niche. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other federal contracts for similar environmental legal and technical support services, often measured by annual spending or contract ceiling values.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false) and does not appear to be a small business set-aside award. Therefore, the primary contractor is likely a large business. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses within this data. The absence of a small business set-aside suggests that the competition was open to all responsible sources, and the nature of the specialized services may have favored larger firms with extensive resources and expertise.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will primarily reside with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contracting officers and program managers. Accountability measures are typically embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards, reporting requirements, and payment schedules tied to deliverables. Transparency is facilitated through federal contract databases like FPDS, where award details are published. While specific Inspector General (IG) jurisdiction is not detailed here, the EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) generally has oversight over EPA spending and programs to detect and prevent waste, fraud, and abuse.

Related Government Programs

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Program
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Program
Environmental Consulting Services
Federal Environmental Enforcement

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to T&M pricing
Contractor performance risk
Complexity of environmental regulations

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $4.0 million to CDM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORPORATION. CONSULTING SERVICES TO SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA, A.K.A. SUPERFUND) AND THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT (RCRA)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CDM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $4.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-03-01. End: 2026-02-28.

What is the track record of CDM Federal Programs Corporation with the EPA for similar environmental consulting services?

CDM Federal Programs Corporation has a significant history of contracting with the EPA and other federal agencies for environmental consulting and program support. Their experience often includes work related to hazardous waste management, site remediation, regulatory compliance, and enforcement support, aligning directly with the scope of CERCLA and RCRA. Analyzing past performance evaluations and contract history within federal procurement databases would reveal specific details about their success rates, adherence to schedules, and overall client satisfaction on previous EPA engagements. This contract's award suggests they met the EPA's criteria for technical capability and past performance in these critical areas.

How does the $3.95 million contract value compare to historical EPA spending on CERCLA/RCRA consulting?

The $3.95 million contract value for approximately two years of support is a moderate investment for the EPA's needs in enforcing CERCLA and RCRA. Historical spending on similar environmental consulting services by the EPA can fluctuate significantly based on program priorities, legislative changes, and the number and scale of enforcement actions. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to analyze annual EPA budgets allocated to external consulting for these specific statutes over several fiscal years. However, this amount is consistent with the type of funding typically required for specialized legal and technical support services needed to manage complex environmental regulations and litigation.

What are the primary risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure for this contract?

The primary risk associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure is the potential for cost overruns if not meticulously managed and monitored. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M agreements reimburse the contractor for direct labor hours and costs incurred, plus a fee. This can lead to higher overall costs if the project scope expands, timelines are extended, or contractor efficiency is low. For the EPA, effective risk mitigation involves robust oversight, clear task definitions, regular progress reviews, and potentially establishing cost ceilings or not-to-exceed clauses within the T&M framework to maintain control over taxpayer expenditures.

How effective is full and open competition in ensuring value for taxpayer money in environmental consulting contracts?

Full and open competition is generally considered a highly effective mechanism for ensuring value for taxpayer money, especially in specialized fields like environmental consulting. By allowing all responsible sources to bid, the government broadens the pool of potential offerors, fostering a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. This process allows the agency to compare multiple proposals based on technical merit, past performance, and price, leading to the selection of the best overall value. While diligent oversight is still crucial, the initial competitive pressure inherent in full and open solicitations provides a strong foundation for cost-effective procurement.

What are the potential performance challenges for CDM Federal Programs Corporation in supporting CERCLA and RCRA enforcement?

Potential performance challenges for CDM Federal Programs Corporation in supporting CERCLA and RCRA enforcement could stem from the inherent complexity and evolving nature of these statutes. CERCLA, dealing with hazardous substance releases and site cleanups, and RCRA, governing hazardous waste management, involve intricate scientific, legal, and regulatory frameworks. Challenges might include keeping abreast of new scientific findings, changes in environmental policy or litigation, and ensuring consistent application of expertise across diverse case types. Maintaining effective communication and coordination with EPA staff and other stakeholders, as well as managing project timelines and budgets under a T&M structure, will also be critical for successful performance.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Environmental Consulting 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

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 10306 EATON PL STE 220, FAIRFAX, VA, 22030

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $4,388,102

Exercised Options: $4,388,102

Current Obligation: $3,951,441

Actual Outlays: $3,925,081

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 11

Total Subaward Amount: $1,521,539

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 68HERC24A0005

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline