NASA awards $7.2M environmental cleanup contract to Jacobs Geosyntec JV for CERCLA remedial activities
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $7,210,633 ($7.2M)
Contractor: Jacobs Geosyntec a Joint Venture
Awarding Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Start Date: 2025-09-23
End Date: 2027-09-30
Contract Duration: 737 days
Daily Burn Rate: $9.8K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS TASK ORDER (TO) IS TO PROVIDE RESTORATION SERVICES TO COMPLETE REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES UNDER CERCLA.
Place of Performance
Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35812
State: Alabama Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
National Aeronautics and Space Administration obligated $7.2 million to JACOBS GEOSYNTEC A JOINT VENTURE for work described as: THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS TASK ORDER (TO) IS TO PROVIDE RESTORATION SERVICES TO COMPLETE REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES UNDER CERCLA. Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical environmental restoration under CERCLA, addressing long-term remediation needs. 2. Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process, potentially leading to competitive pricing. 3. The firm-fixed-price structure shifts performance risk to the contractor, incentivizing efficient completion. 4. A 2-year duration indicates a focused scope for the remedial activities. 5. The contract is awarded to a joint venture, potentially leveraging specialized expertise. 6. Environmental consulting services are essential for regulatory compliance and site restoration.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $7.2 million for a 2-year environmental remediation project appears reasonable. Benchmarking against similar CERCLA-related task orders would provide a more precise assessment, but the scope of remedial activities under federal environmental law often involves significant costs. The firm-fixed-price nature of the award suggests that the government has negotiated a set price, which can be advantageous if the contractor manages costs effectively. Without specific comparable data, it's difficult to definitively state if this is excellent value, but it falls within a plausible range for specialized environmental services.
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 task order. While two bidders are better than one, a higher number of competitors typically drives prices down further and encourages more innovative solutions. The agency's decision to use full and open competition is a positive indicator for achieving fair market value.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to lower prices and better service quality. The fact that two bids were received suggests that the opportunity was accessible to qualified firms, promoting a degree of price discovery.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the communities and ecosystems impacted by hazardous substances, through the restoration of contaminated sites. Services delivered include critical remedial activities necessary for environmental cleanup under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The geographic impact is focused on Alabama, where the remedial activities will be conducted. The contract supports specialized environmental consulting and remediation workforce, requiring skilled professionals in engineering, geology, and environmental science.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions arise, despite the firm-fixed-price structure.
- Ensuring timely completion within the 2-year timeframe is crucial for environmental protection.
- The joint venture structure could introduce complexities in management and accountability if not clearly defined.
Positive Signals
- Firm-fixed-price contract incentivizes contractor efficiency and cost control.
- Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process was utilized.
- Award to a joint venture may indicate access to specialized and complementary expertise.
- The contract addresses critical environmental restoration needs under CERCLA.
Sector Analysis
The environmental consulting services sector is a critical component of government operations, particularly for agencies managing federal lands and legacy contamination. This contract falls within the broader environmental services industry, which includes remediation, assessment, and compliance consulting. The market for such services is driven by regulatory requirements like CERCLA and the need for agencies to manage environmental liabilities. Spending in this sector can fluctuate based on Superfund site progress and agency priorities, but it remains a consistent area of federal expenditure.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications or specific benefits for the small business ecosystem stemming from a set-aside provision. The prime contractor, a joint venture, will likely manage the entire scope of work, and any subcontracting would be at their discretion to fulfill project requirements.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this task order will likely be managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), potentially through its Office of Inspector General (OIG) if significant issues arise. The firm-fixed-price contract structure provides a degree of accountability by fixing the total cost. Transparency will depend on NASA's reporting practices for task orders and the public availability of contract performance information. The specific details of oversight mechanisms would be outlined in the contract's terms and conditions.
Related Government Programs
- CERCLA Remedial Activities
- Environmental Consulting Services
- Federal Site Remediation Programs
- NASA Environmental Management
Risk Flags
- Potential for unforeseen site conditions impacting cost and schedule.
- Contractor performance risk in delivering complex remedial activities.
- Ensuring adequate competition for future task orders under this contract vehicle (if applicable).
Tags
environmental-consulting, remediation, nasa, full-and-open-competition, firm-fixed-price, alabama, cercla, task-order, joint-venture, environmental-restoration
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
National Aeronautics and Space Administration awarded $7.2 million to JACOBS GEOSYNTEC A JOINT VENTURE. THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS TASK ORDER (TO) IS TO PROVIDE RESTORATION SERVICES TO COMPLETE REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES UNDER CERCLA.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is JACOBS GEOSYNTEC A JOINT VENTURE.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (National Aeronautics and Space Administration).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $7.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2025-09-23. End: 2027-09-30.
What is the track record of Jacobs Geosyntec Joint Venture in performing similar environmental remediation contracts for federal agencies?
Assessing the track record of the Jacobs Geosyntec Joint Venture requires examining past performance data for both Jacobs and Geosyntec individually, as well as any previous collaborations. Federal contract databases and past performance reviews would be consulted. Key indicators include successful completion of projects of similar scope and complexity, adherence to budget and schedule, and any history of disputes or contract terminations. For instance, if both entities have a history of successfully managing CERCLA sites or large-scale environmental cleanups for agencies like the EPA or DoD, it would suggest a lower performance risk for this NASA task order. Conversely, any significant past performance issues would raise concerns about the JV's ability to deliver effectively.
How does the awarded amount of $7.2 million compare to the estimated cost or budget for this specific remedial action?
The awarded amount of $7.2 million represents the final negotiated price for the task order. To assess its value, it would be compared against the government's independent government cost estimate (IGCE) or the agency's allocated budget for this specific remedial activity. If the awarded amount is significantly lower than the IGCE, it suggests strong competition and potentially good value. If it is close to or exceeds the IGCE, further scrutiny might be warranted to understand the reasons for the higher cost. Without access to the IGCE or NASA's internal budget, a direct comparison is not possible, but the firm-fixed-price nature implies the government believes this price is appropriate for the defined scope.
What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they being mitigated?
The primary risks associated with this contract include potential cost overruns due to unforeseen site conditions (despite the firm-fixed-price structure), schedule delays impacting environmental restoration timelines, and performance deficiencies by the contractor. Mitigation strategies are embedded in the contract type and the competitive process. The firm-fixed-price contract shifts the financial risk of cost overruns to the contractor, incentivizing efficient management. Full and open competition, with two bidders, suggests a level of vetting and selection based on qualifications and price. NASA's oversight, contract clauses for performance standards, and potential remedies for non-performance also serve as mitigation measures. The specific technical challenges of the site and the contractor's proposed approach would also inform risk assessment.
What is the historical spending pattern for environmental consulting and remediation services by NASA or similar agencies?
NASA, like other federal agencies with significant infrastructure and research facilities, expends funds on environmental compliance and remediation. Historical spending patterns for environmental consulting and remediation services by NASA and agencies like the EPA or DoD can be analyzed through federal procurement data. This contract's value of $7.2 million should be viewed in the context of typical task order sizes for CERCLA activities. If NASA has previously awarded similar-sized contracts for environmental restoration, it indicates a consistent level of investment. Significant deviations from historical spending could signal a change in program priorities, an increase in the complexity of environmental issues, or a shift in contracting strategies. Benchmarking against comparable agencies helps contextualize this award.
How does the 'Environmental Consulting Services' NAICS code (541620) align with the contract's objective of 'Restoration Services' under CERCLA?
The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541620, 'Environmental Consulting Services,' broadly encompasses the provision of advice and assistance on environmental issues. This includes services like environmental impact analysis, site assessment, remediation planning, and compliance consulting. The contract's objective, 'to provide restoration services to complete remedial activities under CERCLA,' directly aligns with this NAICS code. Remedial activities under CERCLA often require extensive consulting services for site investigation, risk assessment, development of cleanup strategies, and oversight of the remediation process. Therefore, the chosen NAICS code accurately reflects the nature of the services being procured, even though the work involves hands-on restoration.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services › Environmental Consulting Services
Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 445 CHALLENGER RD, CAPE CANAVERAL, FL, 32920
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $7,210,633
Exercised Options: $7,210,633
Current Obligation: $7,210,633
Actual Outlays: $925,559
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 8
Total Subaward Amount: $2,478,623
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: 80KSC024DA004
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2025-09-23
Current End Date: 2027-09-30
Potential End Date: 2027-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-03-05
Other National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contracts
- International Space Station — $22.4B (THE Boeing Company)
- TAS::80 0124::TAS Design, Development, Test&evaluation of Project Orion — $15.5B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- Provide Developmental Hardware and Test Articles, and Manufacture and Assemble Ares I Upper Stages. the Upper Stage (US) Element IS an Integral Part of the Ares I Launch Vehicle and Provides the Second Stage of Flight. the US Element IS Responsible for the Roll Control During the First Stage Burn and Separation; and Will Provide the Guidance and Navigation, Command and Data Handling, and Other Avionics Functions for the Ares I During ALL Phases of the Ascent Flight. the US Element IS a NEW Design That Emphasizes Safety, Operability, and Minimum Life Cycle Cost. the Overall Design, Development, Test and Evaluation (ddt&e), Production, and Sustaining Engineering Efforts Include Activities Performed by Three Organizations; the Nasa Design Team (NDT), the Upper Stage Production Contractor (uspc) and the Instrument Unit Production Contractor (iupc). for Clarity, the Uspc Will BE Referred to AS the Contractor Throughout This Document. Nasa IS Responsible for the Integration of the Primary Elements of the Ares I Launch Vehicle Including: the First Stage, US Including Instrument Unit (IU), and US Engine; and Will Also Integrate the Ares I Launch Vehicle AT the Launch Site. Nasa IS Responsible for the Ddt&e, Including Technical and Programmatic Integration of the US Subsystems and Government-Furnished Property. Nasa Will Lead the Effort to Develop the Requirements and Specifications of the US Element, the Development Plan and Testing Requirements, and ALL Design Documentation, Initial Manufacturing and Assembly Process Planning, Logistics Planning, and Operations Support Planning. Development, Qualification, and Acceptance Testing Will BE Conducted by Nasa and the Contractor to Satisfy Requirements and for Risk Mitigation. Nasa IS Responsible for the Overall Upper Stage Verification and Validation Process and Will Require Support From the Contractor. the Contractor IS Responsible for the Manufacture and Assembly of the Upper Stage Test Flight and Operational Upper Stage Units Including the Installation of Upper Stage Instrument Unit, the Government-Furnished US Engine, Booster Separation Motors, and Other Government-Furnished Property. a Description of the Nasa Managed and Performed Efforts IS Contained in the US Work Packages and Will BE Made Available to the Contractor to Ensure Their Understanding of the Roles and Responsibilities of the NDT, Iupc, and Contractor During the Design, Development, and Operation of the US Element. the US Conceptual Design Described in the Uso-Clv-Se-25704 US Design Definition Document (DDD) IS the Baseline Design for This Contract. the Contractors Early Role Will BE to Provide Producibility Engineering Support to Nasa VIA the Established US Office Structure and to Provide Inputs Into the Final Design Configuration, Specifications, and Standards. Nasa Will Transition the Manufacturing and Assembly, Logistics Support Infrastructure, Configuration Management, and the Sustaining Engineering Functions to the Contractor AT the KEY Points During the Development and Implementation of the Program Currently Planned to Occur NO Later Than 90 Days After the Completion of the Following Major Milestones: Manufacturing and Assembly US Preliminary Design Review (PDR) Logistics Support Infrastructure US PDR Configuration Management US Critical Design Review CDR) Sustaining Engineering US Design Certification Review (DCR) After the Completion of an Orderly Transition of Roles and Responsibilities to the Contractor, Nasa Will Assume an Insight Role Into the Contractors Production, Sustaining Engineering, and Operations Support of the Ares I US Test Program and Flight Hardware. After DCR, the Contractor Will BE Responsible for Sustaining Engineering PER SOW Section 4.7, AS Necessary to Maintain and Support the US Configuration and for Production and Operations Support — $10.5B (THE Boeing Company)
- Space Program Operations Contract (spoc) — $8.5B (United Space Alliance, LLC)
- Joint Us/Russian Human Space Flight Activities — $4.7B (Russia Space Agency)
View all National Aeronautics and Space Administration contracts →