EPA's $107M Katrina cleanup contract awarded to Environmental Quality Management, Inc. for remediation services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $106,834,660 ($106.8M)

Contractor: Environmental Quality Management, Inc

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2005-10-31

End Date: 2007-06-04

Contract Duration: 581 days

Daily Burn Rate: $183.9K/day

Competition Type: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: KAT-HURRICANE KATRINA HAZARDOUS WASTE OPERATIONS

Place of Performance

Location: CINCINNATI, HAMILTON County, OHIO, 45240

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $106.8 million to ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT, INC for work described as: KAT-HURRICANE KATRINA HAZARDOUS WASTE OPERATIONS Key points: 1. Contract awarded competitively, suggesting potential for good value, though specific performance metrics are not detailed. 2. The contract duration of 581 days for hazardous waste operations indicates a significant, long-term cleanup effort. 3. The use of Time and Materials pricing could lead to cost overruns if not closely monitored. 4. Awarded to a single contractor, raising questions about the breadth of competition and potential for price optimization. 5. The contract falls under Remediation Services, a critical sector for disaster response and environmental protection. 6. Geographic focus on Ohio (OH) for this specific delivery order, despite the national scope of Hurricane Katrina.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $106.8 million for hazardous waste remediation services is substantial. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale disaster cleanup contracts is difficult without more granular data on the scope of work and specific remediation activities performed. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while flexible, carries inherent risks of cost escalation compared to fixed-price contracts. Without detailed performance reports or cost breakdowns, it's challenging to definitively assess value for money, but the scale suggests a significant investment in environmental cleanup.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded as a competitive delivery order, indicating that multiple vendors likely had the opportunity to bid. The fact that it was competed suggests a deliberate effort to solicit offers and potentially achieve favorable pricing. However, the details of the competition, such as the number of bidders and the evaluation process, are not provided in the summary data. A competitive award is generally a positive sign for price discovery and market responsiveness.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a more efficient marketplace, potentially leading to lower prices and better service quality through vendor innovation.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are communities impacted by Hurricane Katrina requiring hazardous waste cleanup. Services delivered include critical remediation of contaminated sites, contributing to environmental restoration. The geographic impact is focused on Ohio (OH) for this specific delivery order, though the overall program addresses a national disaster. Workforce implications include employment for specialized environmental cleanup personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials pricing can lead to unpredictable costs if not managed stringently.
Limited information on specific performance metrics makes it hard to gauge effectiveness.
The contract was awarded to a single entity, potentially limiting broader market engagement for future similar needs.

Positive Signals

Awarded through a full and open competition, indicating a structured procurement process.
The contract addresses a critical need for hazardous waste remediation following a major disaster.
The scale of the award suggests a significant commitment to environmental recovery efforts.

Sector Analysis

The environmental remediation services sector is crucial for managing industrial byproducts, hazardous waste, and post-disaster cleanup. This contract falls within the broader environmental consulting and remediation market, which is driven by regulatory compliance, environmental stewardship, and disaster response needs. Spending in this sector can fluctuate significantly based on environmental incidents and government priorities. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale EPA or FEMA contracts for disaster recovery and hazardous material management.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business set-aside was not utilized (ss: false) and there is no specific mention of subcontracting goals (sb: false). This suggests that the primary focus was on securing the necessary expertise and capacity for a large-scale remediation project, potentially favoring larger, established firms. The impact on the small business ecosystem would likely be indirect, unless specific subcontracting opportunities were mandated or pursued by the prime contractor.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) program offices responsible for emergency response and environmental cleanup. Accountability measures would be tied to the contract's performance work statement, milestones, and reporting requirements. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS, though detailed operational oversight information is often internal. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Hurricane Katrina Disaster Recovery
Hazardous Waste Management
Environmental Remediation Services
EPA Superfund Program
Emergency Response Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials pricing.
Limited transparency on specific performance metrics and outcomes.
Lack of detail on the number of bidders in the competitive process.
Geographic focus of the delivery order (OH) may not fully represent the national scope of Katrina's impact.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $106.8 million to ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT, INC. KAT-HURRICANE KATRINA HAZARDOUS WASTE OPERATIONS

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 $106.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-10-31. End: 2007-06-04.

What was the specific scope of hazardous waste operations performed under this contract?

The provided data identifies the contract as 'KAT-HURRICANE KATRINA HAZARDOUS WASTE OPERATIONS' and classifies the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code as 562910 for Remediation Services. However, it does not detail the specific types of hazardous waste encountered, the geographic areas within Ohio targeted for cleanup, or the particular remediation techniques employed. A comprehensive understanding of the scope would require reviewing the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and any subsequent modifications or task orders issued under this delivery order.

How does the $106.8 million award compare to other Hurricane Katrina cleanup contracts?

Comparing this $106.8 million award requires access to a broader dataset of Hurricane Katrina-related contracts. The EPA and other agencies (like FEMA and the Army Corps of Engineers) awarded numerous contracts for debris removal, housing, infrastructure repair, and environmental cleanup following the hurricane. Without a comparative analysis of similar remediation contracts, it's difficult to ascertain if this award was high, low, or average relative to the scale and complexity of the work performed. The duration of 581 days (approx. 1.6 years) suggests a significant undertaking.

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

The primary risk of a Time and Materials (T&M) contract is the potential for cost overruns, as the government pays for the actual labor hours and material costs incurred by the contractor, plus a fixed fee or நிர்ணயிக்கப்பட்ட rate. This structure offers flexibility but lacks the cost certainty of fixed-price contracts. Effective management requires rigorous oversight, detailed tracking of hours and materials, and strong negotiation skills to ensure that rates are fair and that work is performed efficiently. Without robust oversight, T&M contracts can become significantly more expensive than initially anticipated.

What was the performance history of Environmental Quality Management, Inc. on similar contracts prior to this award?

The provided data does not include information on the past performance of Environmental Quality Management, Inc. (EQM). To assess their track record, one would need to consult databases like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or review other contract awards to EQM for similar environmental remediation services, particularly those related to disaster response. A review of past performance would indicate their ability to meet deadlines, manage costs, and deliver quality services on comparable projects.

How many bids were received, and what was the competitive landscape for this specific delivery order?

The data indicates this was a 'COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER' (ct: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER) under a larger contract vehicle, suggesting that multiple vendors were invited to bid. However, the specific number of bids received for this particular delivery order is not provided (no: 1 might refer to the number of delivery orders under a base contract, not the number of bidders). A full and open competition is generally positive, but the actual level of competition (number of responsive bidders) significantly impacts price discovery and the government's ability to secure the best value.

What is the total historical spending by the EPA on hazardous waste remediation services, and how does this contract fit within that trend?

The provided data focuses solely on this single contract award. To understand the EPA's total historical spending on hazardous waste remediation, one would need to analyze multi-year spending data across various EPA programs (e.g., Superfund, RCRA, emergency response). This contract represents a significant single award related to a specific disaster event (Hurricane Katrina). Its place within the broader trend would depend on the EPA's overall budget allocation for remediation and the frequency and scale of major environmental incidents requiring such extensive cleanup efforts.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: COMPETITIVE DELIVERY ORDER

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: EQM Technologies & Energy, Inc (UEI: 826517729)

Address: 1800 CARILLION BLVD, CINCINNATI, OH, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $106,834,660

Exercised Options: $106,834,660

Current Obligation: $106,834,660

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 68S60201

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline