EPA's $12.1M Remedial Activities Contract for Woolfolk Chemical Works Site in Georgia

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,112,465 ($12.1M)

Contractor: C M C, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2008-02-22

End Date: 2015-05-19

Contract Duration: 2,643 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.6K/day

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES AT WOOLFOLK CHEMICAL WORKS SITE IN FORT VALLEY GEORGIA

Place of Performance

Location: NICHOLASVILLE, JESSAMINE County, KENTUCKY, 40356

State: Kentucky Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $12.1 million to C M C, INC. for work described as: REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES AT WOOLFOLK CHEMICAL WORKS SITE IN FORT VALLEY GEORGIA Key points: 1. Contract awarded for significant environmental cleanup efforts. 2. Focus on remediation services at a specific Superfund site. 3. Long-term contract duration suggests complex and extensive work. 4. Awarded by the Environmental Protection Agency, indicating federal environmental oversight. 5. Contract type (Time and Materials) can lead to cost variability. 6. Potential for cost overruns due to the nature of environmental remediation.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $12.1 million for remediation services over approximately 7 years appears reasonable given the scope of environmental cleanup at a Superfund site. However, without specific benchmarks for similar complex site cleanups or detailed cost breakdowns, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure, while common for unpredictable remediation work, carries inherent risks of cost escalation if not closely managed. Comparing this to other EPA Superfund remediation contracts would provide better context on pricing efficiency.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: unknown

The competition level for this contract is not explicitly detailed in the provided data. Remediation services for complex environmental sites can sometimes involve limited competition due to specialized expertise required. If this was a full and open competition, the number of bidders would be crucial to assess price discovery. If it was sole-source or limited, it raises questions about whether the government secured the best possible pricing and technical solutions.

Taxpayer Impact: The level of competition directly impacts taxpayer value. Robust competition typically drives down prices and encourages innovation. Limited competition may result in higher costs for taxpayers if effective price negotiation and oversight are not rigorously applied.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the local community and environment surrounding the Woolfolk Chemical Works site in Fort Valley, Georgia, through the cleanup of hazardous substances. Services delivered include the remediation of contaminated soil and groundwater. The geographic impact is localized to Fort Valley, Georgia, addressing a specific environmental hazard. Workforce implications include employment for environmental scientists, engineers, technicians, and laborers involved in the cleanup operations.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials contract type can lead to cost overruns if not managed effectively.
The long duration of the contract increases the risk of unforeseen environmental conditions impacting costs.
Lack of detailed competition information makes it difficult to assess if the best value was obtained.
Environmental remediation projects are inherently complex and can be subject to scope creep.

Positive Signals

Awarded by the EPA, indicating a focus on critical environmental protection.
The contract addresses a specific, identified environmental hazard at a Superfund site.
The duration suggests a commitment to thorough and complete remediation.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Environmental Remediation Services sector, a critical component of the broader environmental services industry. This sector involves the cleanup of contaminated sites, often mandated by regulatory bodies like the EPA under programs such as Superfund. The market size for environmental remediation is substantial, driven by historical industrial activity and increasing regulatory stringency. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale Superfund site cleanup contracts awarded by the EPA or state environmental agencies.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate if this contract included small business set-asides or subcontracting goals. Large environmental remediation projects often involve prime contractors with specialized capabilities, who may then subcontract portions of the work. Analysis of subcontracting plans would be necessary to determine the extent of small business participation and its impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for overseeing this contract. Oversight mechanisms would typically include regular progress reports, site inspections, and financial reviews. Accountability measures are tied to meeting remediation milestones and environmental standards. Transparency is generally maintained through public dockets for Superfund sites, though specific contract details might be less accessible. The EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) would have jurisdiction for audits and investigations if fraud or mismanagement were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Superfund Program
Hazardous Waste Site Cleanup
Environmental Services Contracts
Remediation and Restoration Services

Risk Flags

Cost Overrun Risk (T&M Contract)
Unforeseen Site Conditions
Limited Competition Assessment Needed
Long-term Project Management Complexity

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $12.1 million to C M C, INC.. REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES AT WOOLFOLK CHEMICAL WORKS SITE IN FORT VALLEY GEORGIA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is C M C, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-02-22. End: 2015-05-19.

What is the track record of C M C, INC. with the EPA on similar remediation projects?

Information regarding C M C, INC.'s specific track record with the EPA on similar remediation projects is not detailed in the provided data. A thorough analysis would require examining past performance evaluations, contract history, and any documented issues or successes on previous EPA contracts. Understanding their experience with sites of comparable complexity and scale to the Woolfolk Chemical Works site would be crucial for assessing their capability and reliability in executing this current contract effectively. Past performance is a key indicator of a contractor's ability to meet technical requirements, manage costs, and adhere to schedules.

How does the $12.1 million contract value compare to similar EPA Superfund site cleanups?

Benchmarking the $12.1 million contract value against similar EPA Superfund site cleanups is essential for assessing value for money. Without specific data on comparable contracts (e.g., size of contamination, type of contaminants, remediation technologies used, duration), a direct comparison is difficult. However, Superfund site cleanups are notoriously complex and expensive, often running into tens or hundreds of millions of dollars over many years. The provided value seems within a plausible range for a significant remediation effort, but a detailed analysis would involve comparing cost-per-acre cleaned, cost-per-cubic-yard of soil treated, or cost-per-gallon of groundwater remediated against similar projects managed by the EPA.

What are the primary risks associated with this Time and Materials contract for environmental remediation?

The primary risks associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract for environmental remediation, like this one, revolve around cost control and potential overruns. T&M contracts pay the contractor for the actual labor hours and materials used, plus a fee. This structure is often used when the scope of work is difficult to define precisely upfront, as is common in environmental cleanup where unforeseen site conditions can arise. The key risks include: 1) Lack of cost certainty: It's hard to predict the total cost upfront. 2) Potential for inefficiency: Without fixed labor rates or quantities, there's less incentive for the contractor to be highly efficient. 3) Scope creep: Changes or additions to the work can easily inflate costs. 4) Monitoring burden: The government must diligently track labor hours and material costs to ensure reasonableness and necessity.

What specific remediation activities are covered under this contract?

The contract is broadly described as 'REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES AT WOOLFOLK CHEMICAL WORKS SITE IN FORT VALLEY GEORGIA.' While specific activities are not itemized in the provided data, typical remedial activities at a chemical works site under the EPA's Superfund program can include: site investigation and characterization (sampling soil, groundwater, air), containment of hazardous materials (e.g., capping contaminated areas), excavation and off-site disposal of contaminated soil, in-situ or ex-situ treatment of contaminants (e.g., soil vapor extraction, bioremediation), groundwater treatment, long-term monitoring, and site restoration. The exact scope would be detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW).

How has EPA spending on remediation services trended historically, and does this contract align?

EPA spending on remediation services, particularly through the Superfund program, has historically been substantial, driven by the need to address legacy contamination from industrial activities. Annual appropriations for Superfund cleanups fluctuate based on congressional funding, program priorities, and the number and complexity of sites requiring attention. While the specific historical spending trend for the EPA's remediation services isn't provided here, this $12.1 million contract represents a significant, multi-year investment for a single site. To assess alignment, one would need to compare this contract's value and duration against the EPA's overall remediation budget and the average cost per Superfund site cleanup over time.

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

Contractor Details

Address: 1151 JESSAMINE STATION PI, NICHOLASVILLE, KY, 40356

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,112,465

Exercised Options: $12,112,465

Current Obligation: $12,112,465

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: EPS40702

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline