Environmental Restoration LLC awarded $2.09M for Caribou Power Plant site remediation, a Time and Materials task order

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $2,086,325 ($2.1M)

Contractor: Environmental Restoration LLC

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2023-08-30

End Date: 2025-12-31

Contract Duration: 854 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: CONTRACT# 68HE0121D0005 ERRS V CARIBOU POWER PLANT SITE. ISSUANCE OF A NEW TASK ORDER FOR THE CARIBOU POWER PLANT SITE.

Place of Performance

Location: CARIBOU, AROOSTOOK County, MAINE, 04736

State: Maine Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $2.1 million to ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION LLC for work described as: CONTRACT# 68HE0121D0005 ERRS V CARIBOU POWER PLANT SITE. ISSUANCE OF A NEW TASK ORDER FOR THE CARIBOU POWER PLANT SITE. Key points: 1. The contract is a Time and Materials (T&M) type, which can pose cost control challenges if not closely managed. 2. The award was made under full and open competition after exclusion of sources, suggesting a competitive process with specific justifications. 3. The contract duration of 854 days indicates a significant, long-term remediation effort at the Caribou Power Plant site. 4. The primary agency and the awarding agency are both the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), indicating direct oversight. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 562910 points to a focus on Remediation Services. 6. The contract was issued as a Delivery Order, a common mechanism for tasking within a larger contract vehicle.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The awarded amount of $2.09 million for remediation services over 854 days needs further benchmarking against similar EPA environmental restoration projects. As a Time and Materials contract, the final cost is highly dependent on the hours worked and material costs incurred, making a direct comparison to fixed-price contracts difficult. Without detailed breakdowns of labor rates and material markups, assessing the value-for-money is challenging. The absence of a ceiling price or specific performance metrics in the provided data makes it difficult to definitively assess if this represents a good deal for taxpayers.

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 competition was intended to be broad, specific sources were excluded, likely due to pre-existing contract vehicles or specific technical requirements. The number of bidders is not specified, but the 'exclusion of sources' clause suggests a potentially narrowed field compared to a pure full and open competition. This could impact price discovery if fewer qualified bidders were able to participate.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of certain sources, even in a competitive environment, may limit the potential for the most aggressive pricing. Taxpayers benefit from competition, but the specific nature of this exclusion warrants scrutiny to ensure maximum value was achieved.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and potentially the local community surrounding the Caribou Power Plant site, through environmental cleanup. The service delivered is environmental remediation, specifically addressing issues at the Caribou Power Plant site. The geographic impact is localized to Maine (ME), specifically the Caribou Power Plant site. Workforce implications include employment for environmental remediation specialists, technicians, and support staff involved in the project.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials contract type can lead to cost overruns if not managed diligently.
The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition method might have limited the number of potential bidders and thus the competitive pressure on pricing.
Lack of specific performance metrics or a ceiling price in the provided summary makes it difficult to assess cost-effectiveness proactively.

Positive Signals

The contract was awarded under a competitive process, indicating efforts to secure multiple bids.
The EPA, a primary environmental regulatory body, is overseeing this remediation effort, suggesting adherence to environmental standards.
The project addresses a specific environmental site (Caribou Power Plant), indicating a targeted effort to mitigate potential hazards.

Sector Analysis

The environmental remediation sector is a critical component of the broader environmental services industry, focusing on cleaning up contaminated sites. This contract falls under the Remediation Services (NAICS 562910) category. The market for environmental remediation is driven by regulatory requirements, historical industrial activity, and government initiatives for site cleanup. Spending in this sector can vary significantly based on the scale and complexity of contamination, with government agencies like the EPA being major clients for such services.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this contract. Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific impacts on the small business ecosystem stemming from set-aside provisions. However, the prime contractor, Environmental Restoration LLC, may engage small businesses as subcontractors, which is not detailed in this summary.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight is primarily provided by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as indicated by both the awarding and servicing agencies. As a task order under a larger contract vehicle, the specific oversight mechanisms would be detailed within the parent contract's terms and conditions. Transparency would depend on the EPA's public reporting practices for environmental remediation projects and contract awards. Inspector General jurisdiction would typically apply to ensure the integrity and efficiency of federal spending.

Related Government Programs

EPA Superfund Program
Defense Environmental Remediation Programs
Brownfields Program
RCRA Corrective Actions

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials contract type.
Limited transparency on the specific reasons for excluding certain sources in the competition.
Need for detailed benchmarking of T&M rates against industry standards.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $2.1 million to ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION LLC. CONTRACT# 68HE0121D0005 ERRS V CARIBOU POWER PLANT SITE. ISSUANCE OF A NEW TASK ORDER FOR THE CARIBOU POWER PLANT SITE.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $2.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-08-30. End: 2025-12-31.

What is the track record of Environmental Restoration LLC with the EPA on similar remediation projects?

Environmental Restoration LLC has a history of working with the EPA on various environmental projects. Analyzing their past performance on similar remediation contracts, particularly those involving power plant sites or complex contamination, would provide insight into their capabilities and cost management. Data on past contract values, completion times, and any performance issues or awards associated with their previous EPA work would be crucial. A review of contract databases and agency performance reports could reveal trends in their project execution, adherence to schedules, and budget performance, helping to contextualize the current award.

How does the Time and Materials (T&M) pricing structure compare to industry benchmarks for environmental remediation services?

Time and Materials (T&M) contracts are common in remediation but require careful oversight. For environmental remediation, industry benchmarks for T&M pricing typically involve established hourly rates for various labor categories (e.g., project managers, engineers, technicians) and a markup percentage for materials and equipment. Comparing the rates and markups in this contract to established industry standards, such as those published by professional organizations or found in similar government solicitations, is essential. The absence of a contract ceiling price in the provided data makes it difficult to assess the potential final cost against benchmarks, highlighting the importance of monitoring actual expenditures against estimated costs.

What are the specific environmental risks being addressed at the Caribou Power Plant site, and how does this contract align with mitigation goals?

The specific environmental risks at the Caribou Power Plant site are not detailed in the provided contract abstract. However, remediation services typically address contamination from hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. Understanding the nature of the contamination (e.g., heavy metals, hydrocarbons, asbestos) and the extent of the affected area is critical. This contract's alignment with mitigation goals would be assessed by reviewing the Statement of Work (SOW) to ensure the tasks outlined directly address the identified risks and contribute to achieving regulatory cleanup standards or environmental restoration objectives for the site.

What is the historical spending pattern for environmental remediation services by the EPA, and how does this award fit within that context?

The EPA consistently allocates significant funding towards environmental remediation, particularly through programs like Superfund and RCRA. Historical spending patterns reveal a substantial and ongoing investment in cleaning up contaminated sites across the nation. This $2.09 million award for the Caribou Power Plant site represents one component of the EPA's broader remediation efforts. To contextualize it, one would examine the EPA's annual budget allocations for remediation, the average cost and duration of similar site cleanup projects, and the number of task orders issued annually. This helps determine if the scale and cost of this particular award are typical or outliers within the agency's overall remediation portfolio.

What are the potential cost control challenges associated with this Time and Materials contract, and what oversight mechanisms are in place?

Time and Materials (T&M) contracts inherently carry cost control challenges because the final price is not fixed and depends on the actual labor hours and material costs incurred. Potential issues include scope creep, inefficient labor utilization, and inflated material costs. Effective oversight mechanisms are crucial to mitigate these risks. These typically include rigorous review and approval of timesheets, detailed tracking of material usage and costs, regular progress reviews, and potentially the establishment of not-to-exceed (NTE) limits for specific tasks or the overall contract. The EPA's contract officers and technical monitors play a vital role in ensuring that all billable hours and materials are reasonable, allocable, and necessary for the work performed.

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS (Y)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1666 FABICK DR, FENTON, MO, 63026

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $2,086,325

Exercised Options: $2,086,325

Current Obligation: $2,086,325

Actual Outlays: $2,086,325

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 68HE0121D0005

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline