NASA awards $708K task order for PFAS environmental support at Wallops Flight Facility to Tetra Tech

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $7,082,661 ($7.1M)

Contractor: Tetra Tech, Inc.

Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Start Date: 2024-08-15

End Date: 2027-08-31

Contract Duration: 1,111 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: TASK ORDER - SITEWIDE PFAS AND PROGRAM SUPPORT AT WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY, WALLOPS ISLAND, VA. ISSUED UNDER - KSC NASA ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND COMPLIANCE CONTRACT (NERCC).

Place of Performance

Location: WALLOPS ISLAND, ACCOMACK County, VIRGINIA, 23337

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $7.1 million to TETRA TECH, INC. for work described as: TASK ORDER - SITEWIDE PFAS AND PROGRAM SUPPORT AT WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY, WALLOPS ISLAND, VA. ISSUED UNDER - KSC NASA ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND COMPLIANCE CONTRACT (NERCC). Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical environmental compliance for PFAS at a key NASA facility. 2. Task order issued under a broader environmental restoration and compliance contract. 3. Full and open competition indicates a potentially competitive bidding process. 4. Fixed-price contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor. 5. Duration of over three years suggests a sustained need for these services. 6. Small business participation is not explicitly mandated for this specific award.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $708,266 for a period of approximately three years appears reasonable for specialized environmental consulting services. Benchmarking against similar task orders for PFAS support at federal facilities would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price structure suggests that the agency has a clear understanding of the scope and has negotiated a price that aims to control costs, with the contractor bearing the risk of cost overruns.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This task order was awarded under a full and open competition, suggesting that multiple qualified contractors had the opportunity to bid. The specific number of bidders for this task order is not provided, but the competition type generally fosters price discovery and encourages competitive pricing. The use of a broader Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract vehicle likely facilitated this competitive process.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition is favorable for taxpayers as it is designed to yield the best value through a competitive marketplace, potentially leading to lower prices and higher quality services.

Public Impact

Benefits NASA's Wallops Flight Facility by ensuring compliance with environmental regulations. Delivers essential environmental consulting services related to Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS). Geographic impact is localized to Wallops Island, Virginia. Supports the agency's environmental stewardship and operational continuity.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

Environmental consulting services, particularly those related to emerging contaminants like PFAS, represent a growing sector within the broader professional services market. Federal agencies, including NASA, are increasingly contracting for these specialized services to meet evolving regulatory requirements and manage environmental liabilities. The market is characterized by a mix of large engineering firms and specialized environmental consultancies. Spending benchmarks for similar environmental support contracts at federal installations can vary significantly based on scope and complexity.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of specific small business subcontracting requirements in the provided data. The prime contractor, Tetra Tech, Inc., is a large business. The absence of a small business set-aside means that opportunities for small businesses would likely be through subcontracting, if pursued by the prime contractor.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight will likely be managed by NASA contracting officers and technical representatives responsible for the Wallops Flight Facility's environmental programs. The contract's firm fixed-price nature provides a degree of financial oversight by fixing the total cost. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific performance details may be internal.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

nasa, wallops-flight-facility, environmental-consulting, pfas, task-order, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, virginia, tetra-tech, compliance, restoration

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $7.1 million to TETRA TECH, INC.. TASK ORDER - SITEWIDE PFAS AND PROGRAM SUPPORT AT WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY, WALLOPS ISLAND, VA. ISSUED UNDER - KSC NASA ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND COMPLIANCE CONTRACT (NERCC).

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TETRA TECH, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (National Aeronautics and Space Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $7.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-08-15. End: 2027-08-31.

What is Tetra Tech's track record with NASA and similar environmental contracts?

Tetra Tech, Inc. has a significant history of performing environmental services for various government agencies, including NASA. They have been involved in numerous contracts related to environmental restoration, compliance, and consulting, often dealing with complex contaminants. Their experience with NASA likely includes previous work under the broader NERCC contract or similar environmental support agreements at other NASA facilities. A detailed review of their past performance ratings and any past performance issues on similar federal contracts would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment. Their extensive portfolio suggests a strong capability in this domain, but specific performance on comparable PFAS-related task orders would be the most relevant benchmark.

How does the $708K value compare to similar PFAS environmental support contracts?

The $708,266 value for approximately three years of PFAS environmental support at a single facility like Wallops Flight Facility appears to be on the lower end for comprehensive environmental programs, suggesting a potentially focused scope or a specific phase of work. Larger, multi-year, or multi-site PFAS remediation and support contracts can range from several million to tens of millions of dollars. Factors influencing cost include the complexity of contamination, the extent of investigation required, the number of PFAS compounds of concern, and the specific services needed (e.g., sampling, analysis, risk assessment, remediation design, compliance reporting). Without knowing the precise scope of services for this task order, direct comparison is difficult, but it suggests a targeted effort rather than a full-scale remediation program.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract?

The primary risks associated with this contract include the potential for unforeseen environmental complexities related to PFAS contamination that could exceed the fixed-price budget if the scope is not precisely defined or if significant new issues are discovered. There's also a performance risk, where the quality or timeliness of Tetra Tech's consulting services might not meet NASA's expectations, potentially impacting compliance. Regulatory changes concerning PFAS could also introduce new requirements not initially scoped, leading to change orders or scope adjustments. Finally, reliance on a single contractor for critical environmental compliance introduces a dependency risk.

How effective is the firm fixed-price contract type for managing environmental consulting services?

The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally effective for managing environmental consulting services when the scope of work is well-defined and understood. It incentivizes the contractor to control costs and perform efficiently, as they bear the risk of cost overruns. For NASA, this means budget certainty. However, for complex environmental projects where unforeseen conditions are common (like PFAS contamination), an FFP contract can sometimes lead to contractors being overly cautious, potentially limiting the depth of investigation or pushing back on necessary scope changes. This can sometimes necessitate costly change orders if critical issues are discovered that were not anticipated in the original scope.

What is the historical spending trend for environmental consulting at NASA's Wallops Flight Facility?

Historical spending data specifically for environmental consulting at Wallops Flight Facility prior to this task order is not provided. However, federal agencies like NASA typically have ongoing environmental compliance and management programs that necessitate regular spending on consulting services. Spending trends are often influenced by regulatory changes (like increased focus on PFAS), facility upgrades or decommissioning, and the discovery of new environmental issues. A review of NASA's broader environmental budget and contract awards over the past several years would indicate general trends in environmental service procurement across the agency.

What does the 'issued under NERCC' detail imply about competition and oversight?

The phrase 'issued under KSC NASA Environmental Restoration and Compliance Contract (NERCC)' implies that this task order is a call against a larger, pre-existing contract vehicle. NERCC itself was likely awarded through a competitive process (details of which would be in the parent contract's award documentation). This task order being issued under NERCC suggests that Tetra Tech was either the incumbent or a successful bidder on the larger NERCC contract. The oversight for this task order falls under the administration of the parent NERCC contract, potentially streamlining some administrative processes but maintaining oversight through NASA's contracting and technical personnel.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical ServicesManagement, Scientific, and Technical Consulting ServicesEnvironmental Consulting Services

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICESARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 661 ANDERSEN DR STE 200, 400, 500, PITTSBURGH, PA, 15220

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $7,082,661

Exercised Options: $7,082,661

Current Obligation: $7,082,661

Actual Outlays: $2,603,955

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 80KSC024DA005

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2024-08-15

Current End Date: 2027-08-31

Potential End Date: 2027-08-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2025-12-04

More Contracts from Tetra Tech, Inc.

View all Tetra Tech, Inc. federal contracts →

Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts

View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending