JOFOC for Region 4 ERRS - Final Signature 1-21-2020_1.pdf

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION 4

JUSTIFICATION FOR OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Program Office: Superfund Resource & Scientific Integrity Branch Superfund & Emergency Management Division Region 4

Project Officer: Katrina Jones Resource Management Section Resource Management and Scientific Integrity Branch Superfund & Emergency Management Division Region 4

Contracting Officer: Geoffrey Krieger

Acquisition Management Section Facilities, Grants and Acquisitions Management Branch Mission Support Division Region 4

Address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, GA 30303

Mail Code: 14th Floor

Telephone No.: (404) 562-8058

Email: krieger.geoffrey@epa.gov

Project Identification: Emergency and Rapid Response Services (ERRS) Contract Extensions

Nature and/or Description of Action to be Approved

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) Region 4 intends to extend the Emergency and Rapid Response Services (ERRS) contracts numbered EP-S4-15-03 (Environmental Restoration, L.L.C.), EP-S4-15-04 (CMC, Inc.), and EP-S4-15-05 (Kemron Environmental Services, Inc.)

for an extended period of performance of three months. Additionally, one three-month option, which will be exercised only if necessary, is being added for a new potential period of six months. Currently, the period of performance for all three contracts expires on February 23, 2021. This extension is required to ensure continuity of services and completion of activities performed by the ERRS contractors.

Under the authority of Section 104 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 or Superfund, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA); Section 311 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended by the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990; and Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA);

and pursuant to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) (40 CFR Part 300); Presidential Decision Document (PDD) # 39; the Robert T. Stafford Natural Disaster Act; the Homeland Security Act of 2002; Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 (HSPD-5) and the Federal Response Plan (FRP); and in accordance with any reauthorizations or amendments to any of the above named statutes, as well as new response legislation, the EPA has been delegated the responsibility to undertake response actions with respect to the release or threat of release of oil, petroleum products, hazardous substances, or pollutants and contaminants, that pose an actual or potential threat to human mailto:krieger.geoffrey@epa.gov health or welfare, or to the environment. The EPA is responsible for conducting evaluations and cleanups of uncontrolled hazardous substance disposal sites.

In addition, the EPA has the authority pursuant to Emergency Support Function (ESF) #10 and other laws to help and/or mitigate endangerment of the public health, welfare, or environment during emergencies or natural disasters; to support states and communities in preparing for responses to releases of oil, petroleum products, and hazardous substances; and to provide response and removal services in response to incidents resulting from natural and manmade disasters, weapons of mass destruction, acts of terrorism, and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents, and to Federally Declared Disaster incidents.

The purpose of the ERRS contracts is to provide fast, responsive environmental cleanup services for release of hazardous substances/wastes/pollutants and contaminant/materials and petroleum products/oil for the EPA Region 4. Environmental cleanup in response to natural and manmade disasters, terrorist activities, weapons of mass destruction, and chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear incidents may also be required under these contracts.

The Government intends to extend the three Fixed-Rate, Indefinite Delivery/ Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contracts, with work ordered through the issuance of task orders on primarily a time-and-materials basis.

This justification is for a three-month extension with one (1) additional three-month option that will be exercised only if necessary. The total estimated value for these contract extensions, if the entire period of performance is exercised, is $21 million or $7 million per contract.

Description of Supplies or Services Required for the Reference Contracts

The ERRS contracts to be extended have the following periods of performance, and additional authorized total potential obligation per contract if the base and option are exercised.

In order to determine the scope of contract coverage necessary to preclude a lapse in emergency response services until the ERRS replacement contracts are awarded, Region 4’s Superfund and Emergency Management Division conducted an extensive analysis of every project currently underway under each ERRS contract. This division closely examined the status and the anticipated completion date of each project. Due to the nature of the contracts, it is not possible to accurately predict the need for emergency response services in the future. To ensure continuity of services for each ongoing project, the division explored options to either conclude work at a logical stopping point or to transfer projects to other EPA contracts (e.g., other Regions’ ERRS, Environmental Services and Operations (ESO), Remedial Environmental Services (RES) or site-specific contracts). Based on this review, thirteen (13) sites were identified that are currently in the process of remediation that will not be completed before February 23, 2021. The projects must remain in operation to ensure the EPA continues to address and mitigate endangerment to the public health, welfare or environment and support States and communities in preparing for responses to the release of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants.

The ERRS contracts provide Region 4 response support services for emergency and time critical removal

Contract Number

Contractor Name Contract Start Date

Current Expiration Date

Additional Authorized Amount

EP-S4-15-03 Environmental Restoration 8/22/2015 2/23/2021 $7,000.000 EP-S4-15-04 CMC Inc 8/22/2015 2/23/2021 $7,000.000 EP-S4-15-05 Kemron Environmental 8/22/2015 2/23/2021 $7,000.000 actions to mitigate or eliminate any hazard or damage to the environment resulting from a release or threat of release of hazardous substances, oil and other contaminants of pollutants to the environment. If these projects were to stop or see significant delays, human life and communities throughout the southeast would be negatively impacted.

Identification of Statutory Authority Permitting Other Than Full and Open Competition

The statutory authority permitting other than full and open competition relative to this request is 41 U.S.C §3304(a)(1). Only one responsible source and no other suppliers will satisfy agency requirements as implemented by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.302-1.

A statement demonstrating the unique qualifications of the proposed contractor or nature of the acquisition requiring the use of the authority cited

Region 4 has three contractors currently providing emergency and time critical response services. While each of the companies have comparable capabilities, when awarded a site the contractors develop a deep understanding of the technical issues as well as the community concerns surrounding the site that in turn makes them integral to the success of the project. The ERRS contractors work closely with EPA employees and other EPA contractors to develop a first-hand knowledge of the history of the Superfund sites, understand the heightened sensitivity to the evolving relationship of EPA with the affected communities, and frequently have involvement within the litigation process surrounding the clean-up of certain sites. Because of this, only the contractor identified for each site is capable of performing the work described at this time.

The projects identified below are in a critical stage in the clean-up process and a break in contract coverage would result in a significant impact to human health and the environment, as previously stated.

The contractors currently at each site are the only source that can continue the existing work and support projects that are necessary for mission critical work without unacceptable delays until such time as the ERRS replacement contracts are awarded, for the following reasons:

a. The contractors have the necessary knowledge, staff, and experience to complete the work included in these extensions in the most cost effective and efficient manner for the EPA.

The time critical projects being performed at the Superfund sites require a significant amount of time and resources for the contractor to understand the extensive project background information and become familiar with the sites. This institutional knowledge makes the contractors uniquely qualified to complete the current tasked activities. For example, Kemron is responsible for water treatment at the Mississippi Phosphate site. Without constant treatment of water, and the knowledge of methods refined over the past four (4) years, the potential for an untreated release of contaminated water into the Gulf of Mexico or Grand Bay Estuary represents a catastrophic threat to the ecosystem. At the 35th Avenue site, CMC has built relationships since the start of the task order with the community and affected homeowners that are extremely critical in allowing EPA to remediate contaminated properties. A new contractor would need to rebuild the trust and confidence that has been developed over the years, causing delays to cleanup actions which would further endanger the community health and safety. In addition to the threats to human health and the environment, if a project had to be completed by another contractor, EPA would expend substantial duplicative costs in the form of mobilization and other startup costs that would be needed for a new contractor to become familiar with the site and challenges faced (like hurricanes at the Mississippi Phosphate site), the selected remedy, and the draft design deliverables completed to date. Once this was completed, assuming there were no significant changes recommended, the new contractor would be able to complete the project. This situation would result in increased cost to the government and result in delaying the implementation of the remedy.

Extending the current contracts to maintain continuity of services is the only alternative to meet the Government’s need without causing significant financial harm, creating unnecessary breaks and delays in services, and damaging ongoing enforcement and community engagement actions. Continuity of services will result in significant cost savings and more efficient project performance. The projects listed below are long term work sites. This means the contractors have mobilized trailers and other equipment for a more permanent presence. In many cases, longer term housing/rental agreements have been negotiated for personnel, leading to cost savings when compared to per-diem or above per diem rate hotels. Local hiring has been utilized to reduce costs and eliminate per diem completely. Equipment rates, negotiated by each contractor at the time of contract award, can change based on subcontract agreements or usage rate discounts. The existing contracts contain a clause (B-2 Fixed Rates for Labor, Equipment and Other Items) that requires new negotiated usage rates when the average purchase price is reached for a particular piece of equipment. This discount can be up to half the usual rate for equipment. If the current contracts are not extended, mission critical projects such as, but not limited to, the Mississippi Phosphate water treatment, Westside Lead, Ore Knob, Davidson Asbestos and 35th Avenue will be negatively impacted.

Environmental Restoration, CMC and Kemron all have past performance records that indicate acceptable performance and are able to be determined responsible contractors.

b. These services are needed on an ongoing basis while the Agency completes the procurement process of the new ERRS contracts.

Region 4 is dependent on the ERRS contracts to meet mission critical work related to cleanup of Superfund sites. EPA does not have in-house resources or expertise to perform the cleanups work required under the ERRS contracts. Region 4 did explore the potential to shift long term sites to other contracts; however, the ESO and RES contracts do not provide all the same services or have the capabilities that ERRS contracts have. The pre-priced labor and equipment rates in ERRS contracts allow for rapid changes when site conditions dictate a new approach, or the addition of new equipment or personnel. Another possibility explored was a regional crossover (i.e., using another region’s ERRS contract). This is not an acceptable solution, as two of the contractors do not currently hold ERRS contracts in other regions, meaning that many of the most pressing sites would need to transition to a new contractor and lead to significant delays as described above. Additionally, the other EPA regions cannot provide the potentially significant contract capacity that Region 4 requires to maintain work at existing sites while also responding to unplanned emergencies.

Specific task orders needing extensions are identified in the following tables. This is not a complete list of task orders that are in existence at the time of this document but is a listing of critical sites that will require contractor support after the current ERRS contracts expires on February 23, 2021.

Site Name Contractor Current Cost Task Order Initiated 35th Avenue CMC $22,847,092.87 8/25/15 Southside Chattanooga CMC $16,369,629.45 2/22/19 Westside Lead CMC $7,272,000.00 12/2/19

35th Avenue Site, Birmingham, AL - As a result of contamination from a coke manufacturing facility, high levels of benzo (a) pyrene and arsenic have impacted the surrounding communities. This site has been active as a removal action since 2014 (continued with CMC under EP-S4-15-04 beginning August

25, 2015) addressing different phases based on a tiered approach for those residents and properties considered as the most critical in nature. The current phase brings the total properties to 670. Under the most current action, access was granted on a volunteer basis by the owners to continue the excavation of contaminated soil. Many of these access agreements would not have been reached, if not for the long-term trust built by the contractor with community members. There is an urgent need to continue work on this project to protect the community from contamination located on their properties and prevent the spread of additional contamination. Continuing these efforts with another contractor or interruption of removal activities is not in the best financial interest of the government nor the community. Coordination with many residents has already been established between the EPA contractor and the owners detailing the cleanup of their property. This process would have to be repeated if another contractor is to assume the work. New access agreements may need to be signed with each homeowner, which could amount to an approximate 15% increase per property cost due to additional hours on the part of the contractor and EPA to confirm each location has a valid access agreement. This change would also incur an additional mobilization cost for the new contractor. The purchase price has been reached for many pieces of equipment. A new contractor would potentially charge the full contract price, meaning the cost of each location could rise dramatically and impact the number of properties that could be remediated.

Southside Chattanooga, Chattanooga, TN – This site consists of residential and child high impact properties (playgrounds, parks, daycare centers, etc.) where lead-bearing material from past foundry operations were used as fill and topsoil. A total of 1,894 properties have been sampled and cleanup has occurred on 233 properties. Removal activities addressed the known properties in the higher tier category (above 1,200 mg/L). Remedial actions are planned for 620 properties in the second tier (400 – 1,200 mg/L). However, at any point a property may come up that is in the higher tier. These are prioritized and immediately addressed. Coordination between the EPA contractor and the owners has occurred on many properties detailing the cleanup process and obtaining the necessary access and timeline. If there is a change in the contractor, this process would be repeated, and an approximate 10% cost increase would occur per property. An additional mobilization cost for new equipment to be delivered, subcontracts to be negotiated and signed, and per diem costs would also be incurred for the overall site in order to change contractors.

Westside Lead, Atlanta, GA - As a result of various metal smelting processes possibly from foundries, slag was utilized as fill in various residential areas. These neighborhoods were developed during the first half of the 20th century, and prior to the implementation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), when there were no prohibitions against using industrial waste products as fill material. This has resulted in elevated lead levels in the soil greater than 4,000 mg/kg. Removal activities involving the excavation of the contaminated soil began on January 6, 2020. The Site boundary quickly expanded from 368 to 1,068 residential parcels in February 2020. Continuation of these actions are necessary to address the imminent threat to human health. If the JOFOC is not approved, continuing these efforts with another contractor or interruption of these large-scale removal activities would not be in the best financial interest of the government nor the community. Coordination between the EPA contractor and the owners has been established on many properties detailing the cleanup process. This process would have to be repeated and would result in an approximate 10% cost increase per property. Another contractor would have to be tasked with continuing the work, resulting in unnecessary additional mobilization costs, and project delays.

Alaric Groundwater Plume

ER $3,689,048.00 9/17/15

JJ Seifert Machine Shop ER $900,000.00 9/17/15

Anniston Lead ER $1,000.000.00 4/17/17 Montco Research ER $560,000.00 12/20/19 Davidson Asbestos ER $250,000.00 11/13/20 Picayune Wood Treating ER $66,200.00 2/5/20 Galey & Lord Sludge ER $56,000.00 2/11/20

Alaric Groundwater Plume, Tampa, FL – In 2000, EPA placed this site on the National Priorities List (NPL) because of contaminated groundwater and soil resulting from facility operations. It is approximately 1.7 acres in a mostly commercial and industrial area. The site is secure and site contamination does not currently threaten people living and working near the site. However, the continual groundwater monitoring, panning additional treatment of contaminated soils, and conducting the required Five-Year Reviews is necessary to protect the public and the environment. The actual monitoring is important to continue without interruption. This is to ensure the effectiveness of the onsite vapor mitigation system. Changing contractors at this point will incur additional costs. Additional funding would be required to compensate for the added expense to change all duties and allow time for the new contractor to take over the duties. This is estimated as a 10% increase to the project.

JJ Siefert Machine Shop, Ruskin, FL – The JJ Seifert Machine Company operated until 2011, making products such as electronic components, tools, dies, jigs and fixtures. As a result, soil and groundwater contamination were found. Cleanup at the site involved the injection of biodegradable material into the subsurface to facilitate the biological degradation of the volatile organic contaminants (VOCs) in the groundwater. Currently, there is a long-term groundwater monitoring program in process to evaluate the effectiveness of the biological treatment of the VOCs. Interruption of this process is not possible.

Another contractor replacing the existing one would incur costs of approximately $25,000 in startup costs for the new contractor to review the reports and data, set up new testing schedules and laboratories to perform the tests, and site visit costs for the new company to familiarize themselves with the needs of this particular site

Anniston Lead, Anniston, AL – The Anniston Lead Site has been a long-term action addressing lead contamination in residential and commercial areas of Anniston, AL resulting from the cities long history of foundries. In the most recent years additional properties have been identified that required immediate removal actions. Some of this has been hindered by access. The process continues to address the necessary properties as they are identified. It is anticipated that the cost to change contractor is approximately $50,000. This site does not have continual operations, but it is critical that the contractor can respond immediately when a property is identified.

Montco Research, Palatka, FL – The Montco Research Products Site was a chemical manufacturing facility that ceased operation due to a fire in 2018. This resulted in the abandonment of the facility and a variety of leaking vessels, containers, storage tanks, drums and soil contamination. Records and a site evaluation revealed 20,000 gallons of spent hydrochloric acid, 185,660 gallons and 78,000 pounds of spent zinc chloride, and 3,750 gallons of spent ethylbenzene. Additionally, hydrochloric acid, zinc chloride, and ethylbenzene remain at the facility. An emergency response action addressed the immediate issues to control the active releases. The current actions involve treating the liquid wastes, decontamination of the tanks and drums, bulk and disposal of all liquid wastes and possible soil excavation. These actions have just begun in the last few months and is expected to be 90% complete by February 23, 2021 when the existing contract expires Changing contractors at this point would incur unnecessary mobilization costs to complete a project that will be in its final completion stage. It is estimated, the site would incur an approximate 5% increase to the overall site cost.

Davidson Community Asbestos, Davidson, NC - This Site involves property that once operated as an asbestos mill from the 1930s to 1960s. It consists of both residential and commercial properties. The surrounding area was used by the former manufacturing facility to dispose of asbestos containing waste.

It was also used as a fill material for low-lying areas and to supplement residential properties. Surface soil containing asbestos has been detected at or above .25% in various residential properties and a park.

Current removal actions are addressing this threat to human health and the environment as a time-critical action. The urgency of this project is to immediately protect the community from contamination located on their properties that is in a range considered to be of a time-critical nature. Transitioning these activities to a different contractor is not in the best financial interest of the government nor the community. Depending on the progress of the site, these actions could be 90% - 100% complete by 2/23/20. Additional costs to bring in another contractor at this point would incur an additional mobilization cost to finalize the site. The site would incur an additional $20,000 in costs.

Picayune Wood Treating, Picayune, MS - A 5-Year Review performed as part of a remedial action at the Picayune Wood Treating Site noted a 2012 change in the dioxin toxic equivalency factor (TEQ). Previous removal and remedial response actions were based on pre-2012 dioxin TEQs. Therefore, a removal action has be deemed necessary for one additional residential property. Mobilization and removal actions are expected to begin 1/4/21. It is expected this site will be 90% - 100% complete by 2/23/21. Changing contractors at this point incurs additional mobilization costs to complete a project that will be in its final site cleanup stage. The additional costs are estimated to be $7,000.

Galey & Lord Sludge, Darlington, SC - The Galey & Lord Sludge Site consists of approximately 304 acres of a separate agricultural field that received treated sludge from the former Galey & Lord Plant Site industrial waste treatment plant (WTP) from 1993 until 2013. The current focus is on six residential properties with ground water wells contaminated with several per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), notably perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) significantly above both current EPA Advisory concentrations. The source of the contamination is suspected of being connected to the land farming of the WTP sludges from the former Galey & Lord textile mills. Under a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, WTP sludge was land applied during the plant's operational years. Current removal actions are in process to mitigate well water contamination on six residential properties. The removal actions at this site are expected to be 90% - 100% complete by 2/23/21. Replacing the contractor at this point to complete the actions would incur an unnecessary mobilization and change in duties cost of approximately $10,000.

Mississippi Phosphate Kemron $60,917,005.74 9/21/16

Mississippi Phosphate Corporation (MPC), Pascagoula, MS – The former MPC facility is a diammonium phosphate (DAP) fertilizer plant that went into bankruptcy and has subsequently been the cause of various releases that EPA has responded to over the years. Most of the water from this site has a very low pH and contains high levels of ammonia and other contaminants such as phosphorus and fluoride. These pollutants pose a significant threat to the surrounding surface water bodies and ecosystems. The current efforts by EPA have been to address the gypsum stack, wastewater treatment system, wastewater ponds and runoff. These efforts cannot be interrupted or stopped due to the threat to the surrounding area of a release and spread of additional contamination. Transitioning these activities to a different contractor would take months as this has become a complex site while addressing and attempting to control the wastewater. Local hires have been made that not only have saved the government money for per diem and travel, but in the case of a local hire maintenance worker, significant costs for repair of equipment that can be done on site compared to off-site. Additional independent contracts have also been set in place with the same ERRS contractor in order to satisfy the many components of this site. The cost to make a change on a site this complex could incur approximately $500,000 in additional costs to the overall site.

Changing the contractor at this location, for a short period of time until a new contract can be put in place, and task order awarded, would likely negatively impact site operations and planned remediation while also resulting in higher costs.

Awarding new short-term bridge contracts, instead of extending the current contracts, was also considered. This alternative would result in significant adverse impacts (e.g., significant delays and duplicative costs as indicated previously) on these current complex projects. The follow-on ERRS contract has been advertised on beta.SAM.gov and is expected to close January 25, 2021. A bridge contract(s) would require additional time to develop, advertise, and compete. With the level of interest received during market research it is highly probable that a bridge contract would receive significant levels of interest, leading to an extended period of review before an award decision could be made. This likely would result in the bridge contract(s) not being ready for award before the new ERRS contract or before the current ERRS contracts’ expiration date. The significant cost and time required for EPA to compete ongoing projects, and vendors to compete for numerous short-term project specific contracts, would not provide commensurate benefit that might be realized by competing these requirements only for the requirements to be competed again and potentially change contractors within the span of a few months. The current contractors would need to de-mobilize from the site and new contractors would need to mobilize. This pattern could be repeated again when the ERRS competition is complete and new contracts are awarded, meaning there could be multiple contractors and points of contacts in a short period of time. Keeping the current ERRS contracts in place until the new ERRS contracts are awarded allows EPA to leverage the incumbent contractors that already have the organization, institutional knowledge of the sites, resources and staff in place to provide these services without any negative impact related to transition. It is not cost effective and would potentially cause unacceptable delays on mission critical remediation projects, that are essential to protect human health and the environment, for the EPA to negotiate and award a new short-term contract(s) with other source(s).

Description of Efforts to Ensure that Offers are Solicited from as Many Potential Sources as Practicable

As noted throughout the justification, the only viable way to continue mission critical activities while conducting the new ERRS procurement is to extend the three existing contracts with Environmental Restoration, CMC and Kemron. The follow-on ERRS contract(s) will be for a five-year period (three-year base and one two-year option), which gives potential new contractors the time to amortize startup costs across multiple months or years, and time for the contractors to acclimate to the conditions unique to each project. Two or more contracts are anticipated under the new ERRS award, meaning new task orders will be subject to the fair opportunity process (i.e., competition). The solicitation was released on 12/01/2020 with a planned date for receipt of proposals of 1/25/2021. Award of the contracts is planned for April 2021. Once this occurs, a fair opportunity process will need to be conducted between the new awardees, which could take anywhere from 2-3 months for some of the sites. Extending the current contracts will allow for a careful procurement process and a reasonable transition period for the new contracts.

As required by FAR 5.201 and 6.305, this JOFOC will be published on the Federal Business Opportunities website. In accordance with FAR 6.302-1(d)(2), any bids, proposals, quotations, or capability statements that are received will be considered.

Determination of Fair and Reasonable Cost

In accordance with FAR 15.404, the contract rates under the ERRS contracts being extended will be determined fair and reasonable at the time of the award; option rates will also be determined fair and reasonable at that time. Contract rates have, and will, only be adjusted in compliance with the Bureau of Labor Statistics data relative to the affected labor categories. The Contracting Officer hereby determines that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable.

Market Research

In accordance with FAR Part 10, the Agency performed market research as part of the re-procurement of the ERRS contracts. A Sources Sought notice was issued on October 24, 2019 and closed on November 8, 2019. A total of seven (7) responses from interested sources were received. Five (5) out of seven (7) respondents, were registered under the NAICS 562910 as a Small Business in the System for Award Management (SAM). The new ERRS V procurement is based on this market research and ensures maximum competition.

Additional Supporting Facts

One of the fundamental requirements for the ERRS contracts is to provide EPA the ability to respond to unplanned releases of chemicals or oil anywhere in the Region 4 area of Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Mississippi. Each ERRS contract has a requirement to be capable of responding anywhere in the region on a 24 hour a day basis. The contractors are required to have personnel and equipment en route within two hours of notification, and on site within eight hours. These contract requirements necessitate a pool of personnel, equipment and subcontractors on-standby across the region that are available at short notice. Each of the contractors have built up their capacity within the region since the initial award of the contracts. The phone duty On-Scene Coordinator, who changes on a weekly basis, has access to information on each of the existing contractors, their key personnel, equipment, and subcontractors that allow them to make a fully informed decision about what contractor to task for emergencies depending on the location. If Region 4 were to award new contracts, extensive effort would need to be expended to review key personnel to ensure they meet the minimum requirements, the locations of equipment and personnel to ensure they can respond anywhere in Region 4 within the timeframe required, and capabilities of a new contractor to fully perform the statement of work prior to awarding task orders. This would create unacceptable delays, additional costs to the Government, and could potentially prevent the Superfund and Emergency Management Division from responding to releases of hazardous chemicals, which in turn would produce unacceptable threats to community health and safety.

Listing of Sources

In accordance with FAR 6.302-1(d)(2), any bids, proposals, quotations, or capability statements that are received will be considered. A listing of interested sources will be compiled and kept on file for future reference.

Proposed Actions to Overcome Barriers to Competition

None. This is a short-term solution to the Agency’s immediate and ongoing needs for emergency and rapid response services. Each new task order requirement will continue to be subject to the fair opportunity process described in the contracts. Once the new ERRS contracts have been awarded and post award documentation is complete (quality plans, key personnel approval, etc.), sites will be transitioned into the new awards and the existing contracts closed.

Technical Certification

I hereby certify that the supporting technical data in this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief and meets the Government’s minimum needs.

Carol J. Monell Date Director, Superfund & Emergency Management Division Region 4

Contracting Officer’s Certification

I hereby certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of the Contracting Officer’s knowledge and belief.

Geoffrey Krieger Date Contracting Officer

Review

Michael A. Pigram Date Regional Acquisition Manager

Tommie L. Madison Jr. Date Agency Advocate for Competition Office of Acquisition Solutions

Approval

Kimberly Y. Patrick Date Senior Procurement Executive and Director Office of Acquisition Solutions