DoD's $31.6M environmental remediation contract with EA Engineering shows long-term commitment, raising value-for-money questions

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $31,585,418 ($31.6M)

Contractor: EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., PBC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2014-09-17

End Date: 2024-09-16

Contract Duration: 3,652 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF PERFORMANCE-BASED REMEDIATION AT THE JOINT BASE CAPE COD, MASSACHUSETTS

Place of Performance

Location: BUZZARDS BAY, BARNSTABLE County, MASSACHUSETTS, 02542

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $31.6 million to EA ENGINEERING, SCIENCE, AND TECHNOLOGY, INC., PBC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF PERFORMANCE-BASED REMEDIATION AT THE JOINT BASE CAPE COD, MASSACHUSETTS Key points: 1. The contract's long duration (10 years) suggests a need for sustained environmental services at Joint Base Cape Cod. 2. A firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs, but the extended period may obscure true value. 3. The contract was competed after excluding sources, indicating potential limitations in the initial bidding process. 4. Performance-based remediation implies a focus on outcomes, but specific metrics are not detailed here. 5. The total award value of over $31.6 million over a decade warrants scrutiny for cost-effectiveness. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags potential missed opportunities for smaller firms.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

This contract's 10-year duration and significant total award value of over $31.6 million necessitate a thorough review of its value for money. While a firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty, the extended period could mask inefficiencies or opportunities for better pricing if benchmarked against similar, shorter-term remediation contracts. Without detailed performance metrics or comparisons to industry benchmarks for remediation services of this scale and duration, assessing the true value is challenging. The sustained commitment suggests a critical need for these services, but the cost-effectiveness over such a long period requires ongoing evaluation.

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 initial solicitation was open, certain sources were excluded, suggesting a potentially limited initial competition. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'exclusion of sources' clause implies that not all interested parties could participate, which could impact price discovery and potentially lead to less competitive pricing than a truly open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition may mean taxpayers did not benefit from the lowest possible price that could have been achieved through a broader bidding process.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and the Joint Base Cape Cod, ensuring environmental compliance and operational readiness. Services delivered include environmental remediation, likely addressing hazardous waste, contaminated soil, and groundwater. The geographic impact is localized to Joint Base Cape Cod, Massachusetts, contributing to regional environmental health. The contract supports a workforce skilled in environmental engineering, science, and remediation technologies.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition raises concerns about the breadth of initial market engagement.
The 10-year duration of the contract warrants scrutiny for potential cost overruns or inefficiencies over time.
Lack of specific performance metrics makes it difficult to fully assess the effectiveness and value delivered.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government.
Performance-based remediation suggests a focus on achieving desired environmental outcomes.
The sustained award indicates a critical and ongoing need for these environmental services.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Environmental Consulting and Remediation Services sector, a critical area for government operations, particularly military bases. The market for environmental remediation is substantial, driven by regulatory requirements and the need to manage legacy contamination. This contract represents a significant, long-term commitment to addressing environmental liabilities at a major military installation. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large-scale, multi-year environmental remediation contracts awarded by federal agencies, considering factors like site complexity and regulatory drivers.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business set-asides were not utilized (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the contract was not specifically targeted to encourage small business participation. Consequently, there are no explicit subcontracting requirements for small businesses mandated by this award. The impact on the small business ecosystem is neutral to potentially negative, as opportunities that could have been reserved for small businesses were competed more broadly.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Air Force's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price and performance-based aspects, requiring the contractor to deliver specified outcomes within budget. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, though detailed performance reports may not be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Environmental Remediation Services
Military Base Environmental Programs
Hazardous Waste Management
Department of Defense Environmental Contracts

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may obscure value for money.
Limited competition ('exclusion of sources') could impact pricing.
Lack of detailed performance metrics hinders effectiveness assessment.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $31.6 million to EA ENGINEERING, SCIENCE, AND TECHNOLOGY, INC., PBC. IGF::OT::IGF PERFORMANCE-BASED REMEDIATION AT THE JOINT BASE CAPE COD, MASSACHUSETTS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is EA ENGINEERING, SCIENCE, AND TECHNOLOGY, INC., PBC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $31.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2014-09-17. End: 2024-09-16.

What is the track record of EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., PBC with similar federal contracts?

EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., PBC has a significant history of performing environmental services for the federal government, including remediation, compliance, and engineering support. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, particularly those with the Department of Defense or other agencies requiring extensive remediation, would provide insight into their capabilities, reliability, and cost management. Reviewing contract close-out data, past performance evaluations, and any documented disputes or awards can help assess their track record. For instance, examining the number and value of previous firm-fixed-price remediation contracts they've held, and their success in meeting performance objectives and budget constraints, would be crucial. A history of successful project completion and positive past performance reviews would indicate a lower risk associated with this current contract.

How does the annual cost of this contract compare to industry benchmarks for similar remediation services?

The total award of $31.6 million over 10 years averages to approximately $3.16 million per year. To benchmark this, one would need to compare this annual figure against industry data for environmental remediation services at military installations of similar size and complexity. Factors influencing cost include the type and extent of contamination (e.g., soil, groundwater, hazardous waste), the specific remediation technologies employed, regulatory requirements, and labor costs in the Massachusetts region. Accessing industry reports from organizations like the Environmental Business Journal or consulting firms specializing in environmental services could provide average cost per project or cost per unit of contaminant removed. Without such specific benchmarks, it's difficult to definitively state if $3.16 million annually represents excellent, fair, or concerning value.

What are the specific performance metrics and expected outcomes for this remediation contract?

The contract is described as 'Performance-Based Remediation,' which implies that payment and success are tied to achieving specific, measurable outcomes rather than just completing tasks. However, the provided data does not detail these metrics. Typically, performance metrics for environmental remediation could include: reduction in contaminant levels below regulatory thresholds, successful containment of hazardous plumes, completion of site restoration activities, adherence to environmental quality standards, and timely reporting. The expected outcomes would be the restoration of affected environmental media (soil, water) to a safe and compliant state, ensuring the long-term environmental health of Joint Base Cape Cod, and mitigating risks to human health and the environment. A thorough review would require access to the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and performance work statement (PWS).

What is the historical spending trend for environmental remediation at Joint Base Cape Cod?

To understand the historical spending trend for environmental remediation at Joint Base Cape Cod, one would need to analyze federal procurement data (like FPDS) for all contracts awarded to this installation related to environmental services over several preceding years. This analysis should identify the total annual expenditure on remediation, the types of services procured (e.g., assessment, cleanup, monitoring), and the primary contractors involved. Comparing the current $31.6 million, 10-year contract against this historical data would reveal if this represents an increase, decrease, or consistent level of investment. It could also highlight shifts in the types of environmental issues being addressed or changes in contracting strategies. Understanding these trends provides context for the current contract's scale and duration.

What are the potential risks associated with a 10-year firm-fixed-price remediation contract?

A 10-year firm-fixed-price contract for environmental remediation carries several potential risks. For the government, the primary risk is paying a fixed price that becomes uncompetitive if market rates decrease or if the scope of work proves less complex than initially estimated, leading to potential overpayment. Conversely, if unforeseen contamination or complexities arise that were not reasonably foreseeable, the contractor might incur significant losses, potentially jeopardizing project completion or leading to change order requests. For the contractor, the risk lies in underestimating the full scope, duration, or cost of remediation over such a long period, especially given potential inflation, regulatory changes, or technological advancements that could increase costs or require different approaches. Long-term contracts can also reduce flexibility to adapt to new information or technologies.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 225 SCHILLING CIRCLE SUITE 400, HUNT VALLEY, MD, 21031

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $45,926,323

Exercised Options: $31,585,418

Current Obligation: $31,585,418

Actual Outlays: $2,214

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 20

Total Subaward Amount: $51,708,193

Contract Characteristics

Consolidated Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline