Dod's $58M Environmental Remediation Contract Awarded to Environmental Chemical Corporation

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $58,054,655 ($58.1M)

Contractor: Environmental Chemical Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-04-27

End Date: 2006-06-30

Contract Duration: 794 days

Daily Burn Rate: $73.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $58.1 million to ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract value of $58 million over approximately 2.6 years suggests a significant investment in environmental services. 2. The 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION' indicates a broad market solicitation, potentially leading to competitive pricing. 3. The contract type 'COST PLUS FIXED FEE' can incentivize cost control while allowing for flexibility in scope. 4. The award date in 2004 and end date in 2006 place this contract in a historical context, useful for trend analysis. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 562910 points to a specialized focus on remediation services. 6. The agency's selection of a single contractor for this duration implies a need for sustained, specialized expertise.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $58 million contract requires more granular data on the specific remediation services rendered and their scope. Without comparable contract details or unit cost breakdowns, it's challenging to definitively assess value for money. However, the duration of nearly three years for a cost-plus contract suggests a potentially complex or long-term environmental challenge requiring sustained effort. The fixed fee component offers some predictability for the contractor's profit, but the overall cost is subject to actual expenses incurred.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION,' suggesting that the Department of Defense actively sought bids from all responsible sources. This approach is generally favored for maximizing competition and potentially achieving better pricing and quality. The number of bidders (6) indicates a reasonable level of interest in the market for these services, providing a basis for price discovery and selection.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down costs and encourage innovation among contractors.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and potentially the environment, through the remediation of contaminated sites. Services delivered include specialized environmental remediation, likely addressing hazardous waste or pollution cleanup. The geographic impact is tied to the specific military installations or sites requiring remediation. Workforce implications include employment for environmental scientists, engineers, technicians, and support staff involved in cleanup operations.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost-plus contracts can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently.
The long duration of the contract could indicate unforeseen complexities in the remediation process.
Reliance on a single contractor for an extended period might limit flexibility if needs change significantly.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition suggests a robust procurement process aimed at achieving best value.
The fixed fee component provides a degree of cost certainty for the government regarding contractor profit.
The specialized nature of remediation services implies the contractor possesses necessary technical expertise.

Sector Analysis

Environmental remediation services represent a critical sector supporting government and industrial operations, particularly in compliance with environmental regulations. The market is characterized by specialized firms with expertise in hazardous waste management, site cleanup, and environmental consulting. Spending in this sector can fluctuate based on regulatory changes, infrastructure development, and the legacy of industrial activities. This contract fits within the broader category of environmental services, which is a significant component of the professional, scientific, and technical services industry.

Small Business Impact

While the contract was competed fully and openly, there is no explicit indication of a small business set-aside. The nature of large-scale environmental remediation often requires significant resources and specialized capabilities, which may favor larger, established firms. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting opportunities were made available to small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program office within the Department of the Air Force. Performance monitoring, progress reports, and financial audits are standard mechanisms to ensure accountability and transparency. The contract type and duration would dictate the intensity and frequency of these oversight activities. Inspector General involvement would be contingent on any reported fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Environmental Compliance and Restoration
Hazardous Waste Management
Site Remediation Services
Defense Environmental Programs

Risk Flags

Contract duration and type (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) warrant close monitoring for cost control.
Historical data suggests environmental remediation can be subject to scope changes and unforeseen challenges.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $58.1 million to ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION.

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 $58.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-04-27. End: 2006-06-30.

What was the specific nature of the environmental remediation services provided under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract falls under NAICS code 562910, which covers Remediation Services. This typically includes activities such as hazardous waste treatment, disposal, and site cleanup. For a Department of Defense contract, these services could range from cleaning up contaminated soil and groundwater at military bases to managing and disposing of hazardous materials generated by military operations. The specific nature would depend on the environmental conditions at the sites designated for remediation, potentially involving chemical, biological, or radiological contaminants.

How does the $58 million contract value compare to other similar environmental remediation contracts awarded by the DoD around the same period?

Comparing this $58 million contract value requires access to a broader dataset of similar DoD environmental remediation contracts awarded between 2004 and 2006. Without such comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state whether this represents a high, low, or average value. However, $58 million over approximately 2.6 years suggests a substantial project. Factors influencing value include the scale of contamination, the complexity of the remediation techniques required, the duration of the cleanup effort, and the specific geographic location. Larger, more complex sites or those requiring long-term monitoring would naturally command higher contract values.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION's performance on this contract?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract. However, typical KPIs for environmental remediation contracts often include adherence to cleanup standards and regulatory requirements, timely completion of milestones, effectiveness of the remediation techniques employed (e.g., reduction in contaminant levels), safety performance (incident rates), and budget management. For a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract, performance would also be assessed against the efficient use of resources to achieve the fixed fee objectives. The government's quality assurance personnel would likely monitor these aspects closely.

What is the track record of ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION in handling large federal environmental contracts?

Information on ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION's specific track record with large federal environmental contracts is not detailed in the provided data. To assess this, one would need to examine their contract history with federal agencies, including the value, duration, type, and performance ratings of past contracts. A review of contract databases and performance assessment reporting tools (like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS) would be necessary to understand their experience, success rates, and any past issues or commendations related to similar projects.

What are the potential risks associated with a Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract for environmental remediation?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts, like this one, carry specific risks. For the government, the primary risk is that the contractor may not be sufficiently incentivized to control costs, as their profit (the fixed fee) is predetermined. While the 'cost' portion covers actual allowable expenses, there's a potential for less rigorous cost management compared to fixed-price contracts. Conversely, the contractor bears the risk if actual costs exceed estimates significantly, as their fee remains fixed. Effective oversight is crucial to mitigate these risks by ensuring costs are reasonable, allocable, and necessary, and that the contractor is performing efficiently.

How did the 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION' process potentially influence the final contract price and quality of services?

A 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION' process is designed to maximize the number of potential bidders, thereby increasing competition. This heightened competition can exert downward pressure on prices as contractors vie for the award. It also allows the government to select from a wider pool of qualified vendors, potentially leading to higher quality services as contractors differentiate themselves on technical merit and past performance. The fact that six bidders participated suggests a healthy competitive environment, which generally benefits the government through better value realization compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1240 BAYSHORE HGHWY, BURLINGAME, CA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $34,385,764

Exercised Options: $34,385,764

Current Obligation: $58,054,655

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA890304D8672

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline