Environmental Protection Agency awards $3.1M contract for Holcomb Creosote Site remediation in North Carolina

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $3,105,572 ($3.1M)

Contractor: Environmental Restoration LLC

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2022-08-09

End Date: 2026-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,513 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: TIME AND MATERIALS

Sector: Other

Official Description: ERRS V, HOLCOMB CREOSOTE SITE, SITE ID:(B4E6): REMEDIAL ACTION AT HOLCOMB CREOSOTE SITE, YADKINVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA ; BIL FUNDED PROJECT.

Place of Performance

Location: YADKINVILLE, YADKIN County, NORTH CAROLINA, 27055

State: North Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $3.1 million to ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION LLC for work described as: ERRS V, HOLCOMB CREOSOTE SITE, SITE ID:(B4E6): REMEDIAL ACTION AT HOLCOMB CREOSOTE SITE, YADKINVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA ; BIL FUNDED PROJECT. Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical environmental remediation, addressing a specific site with potential long-term impacts. 2. The contract type, Time and Materials, allows for flexibility but requires close monitoring of labor hours and costs. 3. Competition was full and open after exclusion of sources, suggesting a deliberate process to ensure fair pricing. 4. The duration of the contract (over 4 years) indicates a complex and potentially lengthy remediation process. 5. The awarding agency, EPA, is responsible for overseeing environmental cleanup projects nationwide. 6. The project is funded by the Brownfields program, indicating a focus on revitalizing contaminated land.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $3.1 million for a multi-year remediation project appears reasonable given the scope of work. However, without specific benchmarks for the Holcomb Creosote Site's remediation complexity or comparable project costs, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging. The Time and Materials pricing structure necessitates careful oversight to ensure costs remain within expected parameters and do not escalate due to inefficiencies. Benchmarking against similar EPA-funded brownfield remediation projects would provide a clearer picture of cost-effectiveness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

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 may have been excluded based on predefined criteria. The presence of two bidders suggests a moderate level of competition. This approach aims to balance the need for specialized expertise with ensuring a competitive bidding environment, which can contribute to price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive process, even with exclusions, likely provided taxpayers with a more favorable price than a sole-source award. However, the exact number of potential bidders and the reasons for exclusions would offer further insight into the extent of taxpayer benefit.

Public Impact

Residents and the environment in Yadkinville, North Carolina, will benefit from the cleanup of the Holcomb Creosote Site. The contract delivers remedial action services, aiming to mitigate environmental hazards associated with creosote contamination. The geographic impact is localized to Yadkinville, North Carolina, addressing a specific environmental concern in that community. The project supports the environmental services sector, potentially involving specialized labor and equipment for site remediation.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Time and Materials contract type can lead to cost overruns if not closely managed.
The exclusion of sources in the competition process warrants scrutiny to ensure fairness and optimal pricing.
Long project duration increases the risk of scope creep or unforeseen environmental challenges.
Limited public information on the specific remediation technologies to be employed.

Positive Signals

Awarded by the EPA, a leading environmental regulatory agency.
Focuses on a specific, identified environmental hazard (creosote site).
Funded through the Brownfields program, indicating a commitment to land revitalization.
Competitive bidding process, even with exclusions, suggests an effort towards cost control.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Environmental Remediation and Waste Management sector, a critical component of the broader environmental services industry. This sector is characterized by specialized technical expertise, stringent regulatory oversight, and significant government spending due to the legacy of industrial contamination. The market size for environmental remediation is substantial, driven by federal and state mandates. This specific contract addresses a brownfield site, a common focus area for EPA initiatives aimed at cleaning up and redeveloping contaminated properties.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions for this contract. Given the specialized nature of environmental remediation, it is possible that larger, more experienced firms were better positioned to bid. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting opportunities exist for small businesses within the scope of this project.

Oversight & Accountability

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for the oversight of this contract. As the awarding agency, the EPA will monitor the contractor's performance, adherence to the contract terms, and the effectiveness of the remediation efforts. The Brownfields program often involves specific reporting requirements and site-specific oversight to ensure cleanup standards are met. Transparency would be enhanced by publicly accessible progress reports and final remediation assessments.

Related Government Programs

EPA Brownfields Program
Superfund Remedial Action
Hazardous Waste Site Cleanup
Environmental Consulting Services

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to Time and Materials contract type.
Complexity of creosote remediation may lead to unforeseen challenges.
Need for stringent oversight to ensure contractor efficiency and cost control.
Environmental risks associated with handling hazardous materials.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $3.1 million to ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION LLC. ERRS V, HOLCOMB CREOSOTE SITE, SITE ID:(B4E6): REMEDIAL ACTION AT HOLCOMB CREOSOTE SITE, YADKINVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA ; BIL FUNDED PROJECT.

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 $3.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-08-09. End: 2026-09-30.

What is the historical spending by the EPA on environmental remediation contracts in North Carolina?

Analyzing historical EPA spending on environmental remediation in North Carolina requires access to comprehensive federal procurement databases. Generally, the EPA allocates significant funds annually to address contaminated sites across the country, including North Carolina. Spending patterns can fluctuate based on the identification of new sites, the availability of funding through programs like Superfund and Brownfields, and the complexity of remediation projects. For instance, major cleanup efforts at sites with extensive contamination or long-term monitoring requirements would represent larger individual contract awards. Benchmarking the $3.1 million award for the Holcomb Creosote Site against the average contract value and total annual spending for similar remediation projects in North Carolina would provide context on its relative scale and significance within the EPA's regional environmental protection efforts.

What specific remediation technologies are anticipated for the Holcomb Creosote Site, and how do they compare to industry standards?

The provided data does not specify the exact remediation technologies to be employed at the Holcomb Creosote Site. Environmental remediation projects often utilize a range of techniques, including excavation and off-site disposal, in-situ treatment (e.g., chemical oxidation, bioremediation), soil vapor extraction, or containment methods, depending on the nature and extent of the contamination. Creosote, a complex mixture of chemicals, typically requires robust treatment strategies. Industry standards for creosote remediation emphasize minimizing exposure, preventing further environmental migration, and achieving regulatory cleanup levels. A detailed project plan, usually developed by the contractor and approved by the EPA, would outline the chosen technologies, their expected efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and environmental impact. Without this specific information, it is difficult to assess how the chosen methods align with best practices or if they represent innovative or standard approaches.

What is the track record of Environmental Restoration LLC in handling similar EPA remediation projects?

To assess the track record of Environmental Restoration LLC (ER LLC) in handling similar EPA remediation projects, a review of their past performance on federal contracts is necessary. This would involve examining contract databases for previous awards, project scopes, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any history of disputes or corrective actions. ER LLC, as a contractor in the environmental services sector, likely has experience with various remediation techniques and regulatory frameworks. Understanding their success rate, adherence to budgets and schedules, and the quality of their work on comparable sites, particularly those involving creosote or similar contaminants, would provide insight into their capability to successfully execute the Holcomb Creosote Site remediation. Information on their safety record and environmental compliance history would also be relevant.

How does the $3.1 million contract value compare to the estimated cleanup costs for similar brownfield sites?

Comparing the $3.1 million contract value for the Holcomb Creosote Site remediation to similar brownfield projects requires access to a database of project costs and scopes. Brownfield cleanup costs are highly variable, influenced by factors such as the type and concentration of contaminants, the size of the affected area, the chosen remediation technologies, site accessibility, and local labor and material costs. Creosote contamination can be particularly challenging and costly to address. A $3.1 million award for a multi-year remediation effort suggests a project of moderate to significant complexity. To benchmark effectively, one would look for EPA-funded projects of similar scale and contaminant type in comparable geographic regions. Without such comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state whether this contract represents a particularly high or low cost relative to industry norms.

What are the potential risks associated with the Time and Materials (T&M) contract type for this remediation project?

The primary risk associated with a Time and Materials (T&M) contract for environmental remediation is the potential for cost overruns. Unlike fixed-price contracts, T&M agreements reimburse the contractor for direct labor hours at specified rates and for the actual cost of materials used. This structure provides flexibility, which can be beneficial for projects with uncertain scopes or unforeseen challenges, such as complex site conditions. However, it places a significant burden on the government to closely monitor labor hours, material usage, and efficiency to prevent inflated costs. For the Holcomb Creosote Site project, risks include the contractor potentially taking longer than necessary on tasks, using more expensive materials than required, or inefficiently allocating labor. Robust oversight, detailed record-keeping, and clear performance metrics are crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure the project remains within budget and delivers value.

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: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 68HE0422R0021

Offers Received: 2

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: $3,105,572

Exercised Options: $3,105,572

Current Obligation: $3,105,572

Actual Outlays: $2,791,019

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NOT OBTAINED - WAIVED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 68HE0421D0015

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline