EPA awards $9.9M contract for remediation services to AECOM Technical Services, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $9,888,912 ($9.9M)

Contractor: AECOM Technical Services, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2002-08-15

End Date: 2006-08-31

Contract Duration: 1,477 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: VIRGINIA

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $9.9 million to AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of approximately 4 years indicates a medium-term engagement for services. 3. The award to AECOM Technical Services, Inc. places them as a key player in environmental remediation. 4. The contract type is Time and Materials, which can pose cost control challenges if not managed effectively. 5. The agency and servicing agency are both the Environmental Protection Agency, indicating direct internal service procurement. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 562910 points to specialized hazardous waste management services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $9.9 million over approximately four years suggests a moderate investment in remediation services. Without specific deliverables or performance metrics, a direct value-for-money assessment is challenging. Benchmarking against similar remediation contracts would be necessary to determine if the pricing is competitive. The Time and Materials pricing structure, while flexible, carries inherent risks for cost overruns if not closely monitored by the agency.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of two bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this specific contract. While two bidders is better than one, a higher number of bids typically leads to more robust price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition, despite only two bidders, provides some assurance that the government received competitive pricing. However, taxpayers may have benefited from even greater savings if more firms had participated in the bidding process.

Public Impact

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) benefits from this contract by securing essential remediation services. The services delivered likely involve the cleanup and management of hazardous waste sites. The geographic impact is primarily within Virginia, where the contract is serviced. The contract supports jobs within the environmental remediation sector, particularly for AECOM Technical Services, Inc. and its potential subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials contract type can lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently.
Limited competition (2 bidders) may have resulted in a higher price than a more competitive scenario.
Lack of specific performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to assess service quality outcomes.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, ensuring a fair process.
Contract awarded to a known entity (AECOM) with presumed expertise in remediation.
Contract duration of over 3 years allows for sustained service delivery.

Sector Analysis

The environmental remediation services sector is a critical component of the broader environmental services industry, focusing on cleaning up contaminated sites. This contract falls under the NAICS code 562910, which covers hazardous waste treatment and disposal. The market for remediation services is driven by regulatory requirements and the need to address historical pollution. Spending in this sector can fluctuate based on Superfund site designations and other environmental initiatives. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically look at the average contract value for similar remediation projects within the EPA or other federal agencies.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses arising from a specific set-aside requirement. The primary contractor, AECOM Technical Services, Inc., is a large business, and their subcontracting practices would determine any indirect impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As the awarding and servicing agency, the EPA is responsible for monitoring contractor performance, ensuring compliance with contract terms, and managing payments. Transparency is typically facilitated through contract databases like FPDS-NG. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract arise.

Related Government Programs

Superfund Program
Environmental Services Contracts
Hazardous Waste Management
Federal Remediation Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials contract type.
Limited competition may have led to suboptimal pricing.
Scope creep risk without strong contract management.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $9.9 million to AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC.. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $9.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-08-15. End: 2006-08-31.

What is AECOM Technical Services, Inc.'s track record with the federal government, particularly with the EPA?

AECOM Technical Services, Inc. has a significant history of contracting with the U.S. federal government, including numerous awards from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Their portfolio often includes a wide range of environmental services, such as site assessment, remediation, engineering, and consulting. Analyzing their past performance on similar EPA contracts would reveal their reliability, quality of work, and adherence to schedules and budgets. A review of contract databases would likely show a pattern of awards across various agencies, indicating their established presence and capabilities in serving federal environmental needs. Their extensive experience suggests a deep understanding of federal procurement regulations and environmental compliance standards.

How does the $9.9 million contract value compare to similar EPA remediation contracts awarded around the same period?

To benchmark the $9.9 million contract value, one would need to compare it against other EPA contracts for remediation services awarded between 2002 and 2006, particularly those with similar scope and duration. Contracts for large-scale Superfund site cleanups or complex hazardous waste management projects could range from several million to tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars. Smaller, more localized remediation efforts might be valued in the low millions. The Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure also influences comparability, as T&M contracts can be more variable than fixed-price contracts. Without detailed scope information, it's difficult to definitively state if $9.9 million was high or low, but it appears to be a moderate-sized award for a multi-year remediation effort.

What are the primary risks associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract for remediation services?

The primary risk with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract for remediation services is the potential for cost overruns. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M agreements pay the contractor for the actual labor hours and material costs incurred. If the scope of work is not well-defined, or if unforeseen complexities arise during the remediation process, the contractor may need to expend significantly more time and resources than initially anticipated. This can lead to the contract exceeding its ceiling amount. Effective oversight by the agency is crucial to mitigate this risk, involving diligent tracking of labor hours, verification of material costs, and ensuring that work performed is necessary and efficient. Without strong management, T&M contracts can become significantly more expensive than initially budgeted.

What does the limited competition (2 bidders) suggest about the market for these specific remediation services?

The fact that only two bids were received for this contract, despite being awarded under full and open competition, could suggest several things about the market for these specific remediation services. It might indicate that the pool of qualified contractors capable of performing the required work is relatively small. Alternatively, the specific requirements of the contract, its geographic location, or the contract's value might have deterred other potential bidders. It could also reflect the competitive landscape at that particular time. A low number of bidders generally leads to less robust price competition, potentially resulting in higher costs for the government compared to a scenario with multiple competing offers. This underscores the importance of market research prior to solicitation to ensure adequate competition.

How has EPA spending on remediation services evolved since this contract was awarded in 2002?

EPA spending on remediation services has likely evolved significantly since this contract was awarded in 2002. Factors influencing this evolution include changes in environmental regulations, shifts in national priorities (e.g., increased focus on climate change adaptation, emerging contaminants), and fluctuations in congressional appropriations. The Superfund program, a major driver of remediation spending, has seen varying levels of funding and policy changes over the years. Technological advancements in remediation techniques may also have impacted costs and approaches. Analyzing historical EPA budget documents and contract spending data would provide a clearer picture of trends, including the average contract values, the number of contracts awarded, and the types of remediation services most frequently procured.

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: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: AECOM (UEI: 153561212)

Address: 100 W BROADWAY STE 240, LONG BEACH, CA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $9,500,000

Exercised Options: $9,500,000

Current Obligation: $9,888,912

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 68S60202

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline