Army awards $29.8M contract for Sunflower Army Ammunition Plant remediation services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $29,850,962 ($29.9M)

Contractor: Zapata Incorporated

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2015-09-28

End Date: 2020-09-27

Contract Duration: 1,826 days

Daily Burn Rate: $16.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM ALL THE NECESSARY WORK FOR THE SUNFLOWER ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT MEC FOUNDATIONS AND INSIDE SEWER LINES REMOVAL ACTION, LOCATED IN DESOTO, KANSAS. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REVISED SCOPE OF WORK (SOW), DATED JULY 2015 AND AUTHORITY TO PROCEED (ATP) 01.

Place of Performance

Location: DE SOTO, JOHNSON County, KANSAS, 66018

State: Kansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $29.9 million to ZAPATA INCORPORATED for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM ALL THE NECESSARY WORK FOR THE SUNFLOWER ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT MEC FOUNDATIONS AND INSIDE SEWER LINES REMOVAL ACTION, LOCATED IN DESOTO, KANSAS. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REVISED SCOPE OF WORK (SOW), DATED JULY 20… Key points: 1. Contract focuses on MEC foundations and sewer line removal at a former ammunition plant. 2. The contract was awarded under full and open competition. 3. Performance period spans five years, indicating a long-term remediation effort. 4. The contract type is Cost Plus Fixed Fee, which can lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully. 5. The remediation services sector is critical for environmental cleanup and compliance. 6. The award value suggests a significant environmental cleanup undertaking.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $29.8 million for remediation services over five years appears substantial. Benchmarking this against similar environmental cleanup contracts at former industrial sites would be necessary for a precise value-for-money assessment. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type introduces some risk, as it incentivizes the contractor to incur costs to achieve a fixed fee, potentially leading to higher overall expenditures than a fixed-price contract if not closely monitored. Without specific per-unit cost data or comparisons to market rates for similar remediation tasks, a definitive assessment of pricing efficiency is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while the competition was broad, specific sources may have been excluded based on certain criteria. The presence of four bidders suggests a reasonable level of competition, which should contribute to price discovery. However, the 'after exclusion of sources' clause warrants further investigation to understand the rationale and potential impact on the competitive landscape.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to more favorable pricing and innovative solutions. The exclusion of certain sources, if not well-justified, could potentially limit the most cost-effective options available.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and potentially the local community through environmental remediation. Services delivered include the removal of munitions-related (MEC) foundations and inside sewer lines. The geographic impact is localized to the Sunflower Army Ammunition Plant in DeSoto, Kansas. This contract supports environmental cleanup efforts, contributing to public health and safety. The project may involve specialized environmental engineering and construction workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type can lead to cost escalation if not rigorously managed.
The 'exclusion of sources' in the competition clause requires scrutiny to ensure full market potential was explored.
Long duration of the contract (5 years) increases the risk of scope creep or unforeseen environmental challenges.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process.
The contract addresses critical environmental remediation needs at a former military site.
The specified location in Kansas indicates a focus on regional environmental cleanup.

Sector Analysis

The remediation services sector is a crucial part of environmental management, particularly for former industrial and military sites. This contract falls within the broader environmental consulting and remediation market, which is driven by regulatory compliance, legacy site cleanup, and sustainable development initiatives. Spending in this sector can vary significantly based on the complexity of contamination, site size, and regulatory requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be derived from contracts for similar hazardous material removal and site remediation projects at other federal facilities.

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 a set-aside provision. The primary contractor, Zapata Incorporated, is likely a large business, and their subcontracting plans, if any, would not be driven by a small business set-aside mandate for this particular award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army, likely through contracting officers and technical representatives responsible for monitoring performance, cost, and schedule. The Inspector General's office for the Department of Defense may also conduct audits or investigations into contract execution. Transparency would be facilitated through contract award databases and potentially public reports on environmental remediation progress, though specific details of oversight mechanisms are not provided in the data.

Related Government Programs

Environmental Remediation Services
Military Munitions Response Program (MMRP)
Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS)
Hazardous Waste Management
Site Cleanup Contracts

Risk Flags

Cost Plus Fixed Fee contract type carries inherent risk of cost overruns.
Exclusion of sources in competition may limit competitive pricing.
Long contract duration increases potential for unforeseen issues.
Environmental remediation projects are subject to complex regulatory requirements and potential delays.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $29.9 million to ZAPATA INCORPORATED. IGF::OT::IGF THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM ALL THE NECESSARY WORK FOR THE SUNFLOWER ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT MEC FOUNDATIONS AND INSIDE SEWER LINES REMOVAL ACTION, LOCATED IN DESOTO, KANSAS. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REVISED SCOPE OF WORK (SOW), DATED JULY 2015 AND AUTHORITY TO PROCEED (ATP) 01.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ZAPATA INCORPORATED.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $29.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-09-28. End: 2020-09-27.

What is the track record of Zapata Incorporated in performing similar environmental remediation contracts for the Department of Defense?

Zapata Incorporated's track record in environmental remediation for the Department of Defense (DoD) is a critical factor in assessing their capability for the Sunflower Army Ammunition Plant contract. While the provided data does not detail their past performance, a thorough review would involve examining their history with similar projects, including the scale, complexity, and specific types of remediation (e.g., MEC removal, soil and groundwater remediation). Key indicators would include successful completion of previous DoD contracts, adherence to budget and schedule, safety records, and client satisfaction. Information from sources like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) or past performance questionnaires could provide insights into their experience with munitions response actions and compliance with environmental regulations. A strong history with the DoD suggests a higher likelihood of successful contract execution.

How does the awarded amount of $29.8 million compare to the estimated costs for similar environmental remediation projects at former ammunition plants?

The $29.8 million award for the Sunflower Army Ammunition Plant remediation is a significant sum, and its value for money can be assessed by comparing it to similar projects. Benchmarking requires identifying contracts for the cleanup of former ammunition plants or sites with comparable munitions contamination. Factors influencing cost include the extent of contamination, the types of munitions present, the complexity of the site geology, and the specific remediation technologies employed. For instance, contracts involving extensive MEC removal, deep soil excavation, or complex groundwater treatment would naturally be more expensive. Without access to a database of comparable contract values adjusted for inflation, scope, and location, it is difficult to definitively state whether $29.8 million is high or low. However, the five-year duration suggests a substantial scope of work, making the annual average expenditure around $6 million, which is within the range for large-scale environmental cleanup projects.

What are the primary risks associated with the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type for this remediation project?

The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type, used for the Sunflower Army Ammunition Plant remediation, presents specific risks. Under CPFF, the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. The primary risk for the government is cost overrun; since the contractor's fee is fixed, they have less incentive to control costs compared to fixed-price contracts. If costs escalate due to unforeseen site conditions, inefficient performance, or scope creep, the total expenditure can significantly exceed initial estimates, although the fee itself remains constant. Effective oversight, rigorous cost tracking, and clear definition of allowable costs are crucial to mitigate these risks. The government must ensure that the contractor exercises due diligence in managing expenses, as the financial burden of cost increases ultimately falls on the agency.

What does the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' clause imply for the bidding process and potential cost savings?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' clause indicates that the solicitation was made available to all responsible prospective contractors, but certain sources were excluded from consideration. This exclusion must be justified by the agency, often based on factors like national security, specialized capabilities, or previous performance issues. While it aims for broad competition, the exclusion of specific entities could potentially limit the pool of bidders. If the excluded sources were highly competitive or offered unique advantages, their absence might reduce the overall competitive pressure, potentially impacting price discovery and cost savings for the taxpayer. The number of bidders (four in this case) provides some indication of the competitive landscape, but understanding the rationale behind the exclusions is key to assessing the full impact on cost-effectiveness.

How has historical spending on environmental remediation at the Sunflower Army Ammunition Plant or similar sites evolved over time?

Analyzing historical spending on environmental remediation at the Sunflower Army Ammunition Plant or similar sites is crucial for understanding trends and forecasting future needs. The provided data pertains to a single contract awarded in 2015. To assess historical spending evolution, one would need to examine previous contracts related to this specific site or comparable ammunition plants. This would involve looking at spending patterns before and after major regulatory changes, shifts in remediation technologies, or changes in agency priorities. For example, increased focus on munitions constituents (MC) or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) might have led to new remediation efforts and associated spending. Understanding the historical context helps in evaluating whether current spending levels are consistent, increasing, or decreasing relative to past efforts and the overall scope of the environmental challenge.

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 › NATURAL RESOURCES - OTHER SVCS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Zapata Group, Inc (UEI: 080313152)

Address: 6302 FAIRVIEW RD STE 600, CHARLOTTE, NC, 28210

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Hispanic American Owned Business, Minority Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $36,417,708

Exercised Options: $29,850,962

Current Obligation: $29,850,962

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W9128F13D0025

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline