TTech SS JandA_Signed_1.pdf

JUSTIFICATION FOR EXCEPTION TO FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Environmental Protection Agency

Remedial Acquisition Framework Contracts – Design and Engineering Services

1. Agency/Contracting Activity:

Contracting Officer: Karyn Price, Region 3

Address: US Environmental Protection Agency Region 3 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, PA 19103

Mail Code: 3MD10

Telephone No.: (215) 814-5310

Email: price.karyn@epa.gov

Program Office: Superfund & Emergency Management Division Site Remediation Branch

Project Officer: William Geiger, Remedial Project Manager Rombel Arquines, Remedial Project Manager John Banks, Remedial Project Manager Stepan Nevshehirlian, Remedial Project Manager

Project Identification: Remedial Acquisition Framework Contracts – Design and Engineering Services for Region 3 Baghurst Drive Superfund Site Old Wilmington Road GW Contamination Superfund Site Safety Light Superfund Site Shaffer Equipment/Arbuckle Creek Area Site

2. Nature and/or Description of Action to be Approved

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 3 intends to order the work described below under the Remedial Acquisition Framework (RAF) multiple award Design and Engineering Services (DES) suite of contracts, using the authority of FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B), “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.”

As described below, this work is limited to finalizing work in progress, which is substantially complete. This includes only the completion of the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) at the Baghurst Drive Superfund Site, Old Wilmington Road GW Contamination

Superfund Site, and Safety Light Superfund Site, as well as completion of the Phase I RI Technical Memorandum at the Shaffer Equipment/Arbuckle Creek Area Superfund Site.

Baghurst Drive Superfund Site

The Baghurst Drive Superfund Site includes a chlorinated solvent plume that originates on a farm property and extends into a nearby residential neighborhood. EPA initiated an RI/FS at the Site in 2016, which included a field investigation, RI Report, FS Report, and support to EPA in the development of the Proposed Remedial Action Plan (PRAP) and Record of Decision (ROD).

It is critical to complete the RI/FS in a timely manner so EPA may issue the ROD selecting the remedial action. It is important to address the on-going negative effects of this chlorinated solvent plume on the residential neighborhood without creating unnecessary delays to implementing the remedy, and to ensure protection of human health and the environment.

EPA tasked Tetra Tech to perform the RI/FS at this site under Work Assignment (WA) 067RICOA3WY, Response Action Contract (RAC) EP-S3-07-04. Tetra Tech made significant progress in completing this RI/FS as approximately 90% of its work under this WA is now complete.

EPA has obligated and expects to pay $1,278,679 for the RI/FS. Of that amount, approximately $75,000 remains to be paid to obtain delivery of the final product, which is approximately 5.5% of the entire work effort. Tetra Tech has completed the field investigation and the RI Report and has submitted the draft FS Report for review and comment. Tetra Tech must be allowed to complete this work. It will address EPA comments on the draft FS Report, submit a draft final FS Report, final FS Report and provide support to EPA during EPA’s preparation of the PRAP and ROD.

Old Wilmington Road GW Contamination Superfund Site

The Old Wilmington Road GW Contamination Superfund Site (Old Wilmington Road Site) includes four Investigation Areas and three inter-connected plumes of groundwater with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) at concentrations above maximum contaminant levels (MCLs).

Residential wells in the vicinity of the site are also negatively impacted by VOCs above MCLs.

EPA initiated an RI/FS at the Site in February 2000, which included a field investigation, RI Report, FS Report, and support to EPA in the development of the PRAP and ROD. It is critical to complete the RI/FS in a timely manner so EPA may issue the ROD selecting the remedial action. It is important to address this plume and its on-going negative effects on the residents.

EPA must provide a permanent remedy for impacted residential wells without creating unnecessary delays to implementing the remedy, and ensure protection of human health and the environment.

EPA tasked Tetra Tech to perform the RI/FS at this site under, WA058RICO03CK, under its RAC EP-S3-07-04. Tetra Tech made significant progress in completing this RI/FS as approximately 90% of its work under this WA is now complete.

EPA has obligated and expects to pay $1,480,363 for the RI/FS. Of that amount, approximately $75,000 remains to be paid to obtain delivery of the final product, which is approximately 5% of the entire work effort. Tetra Tech has completed the field investigation and the RI Report and has submitted to EPA a draft FS Report for review and comment. Tetra Tech must be allowed to complete this work. It will address EPA comments on the draft FS Report, submit a draft final FS Report, final FS Report, and provide support to EPA during EPA’s preparation of the PRAP and

ROD.

Safety Light Superfund Site

The Safety Light Superfund Site includes groundwater and soils contaminated with radionuclides, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and metals. EPA initiated an RI/FS for Operable Unit 2 (OU2) in October 2004 and for OU3 in May 2006, both of which included a field investigation, risk assessments, RI/FS Report, and support to EPA in the development of the PRAP and ROD. A portion of the Site lies within the floodplain of the Susquehanna River and is susceptible to flooding. In addition, there has been significant redevelopment interest in the site. Completion of the RI/FS in a timely manner is critical to select a remedial action in the ROD to protect human health and the environment from potential flood events and during redevelopment.

EPA tasked Tetra Tech to perform the RI/FS at this site under two separate WAs for these OUs.

These were WA 013RICO03DG for OU2 and 014RICO03DG for OU3, under its RAC EP-S3-07-

04. Tetra Tech made significant progress in completing the OU2 and OU3 draft RI/FS Reports under its RAC WA and the majority of Tetra Tech’s work is now complete.

EPA obligated and expects to pay $765,050 for the OU2 RI/FS. Of that amount, the total estimated price to complete the OU2 RI/FS is $150,000, which is approximately 20% of the entire work effort for OU2. Tetra Tech has completed the field investigation and previously submitted a draft RI/FS Report for OU2. It could not be finalized, as explained below.

EPA has obligated and expects to pay $1,029,760 for the OU3 RI/FS. Of that amount, the total estimated price to complete the OU3 RI/FS is $150,000, which is approximately 13% of the entire work effort for OU3. Tetra Tech has completed the field investigation and previously submitted a draft RI/FS Report for OU3. It could not be finalized, as explained below.

Due to extenuating facts and no fault of its own, Tetra Tech was prevented from finalizing both RI/FS reports. Ongoing Removal Actions and an Early-Interim Remedial Action completed in 2019 generated substantial new information that needed to be incorporated into each of these draft RI/FS Reports. These will be submitted no later than June 6, 2020, for EPA review and comment.

Tetra Tech must be allowed to address EPA comments on the RI/FS Reports, submit draft final RI/FS Reports, final RI/FS Reports and provide support to EPA during EPA’s preparation of the PRAP(s) and ROD(s).

Shaffer Equipment/Arbuckle Creek Area Superfund Site

The Shaffer Equipment/Arbuckle Creek Area Superfund Site includes PCB contaminated soil and sediment from a former equipment manufacturer in Minden, WV. EPA initiated an RI/FS at the site in March 2019, which included phased field investigations, risk assessments, RI Report, FS

Report, and support to EPA in the development of the PRAP and ROD. It is critical to complete the RI/FS in a timely manner so EPA may issue the ROD selecting the remedial action. It is important to identify and address potential risks and on-going negative effects to residents in the vicinity of the site, and not create unnecessary delays to implementing the remedy. This will also ensure protection of human health and the environment.

EPA tasked Tetra Tech to perform the RI/FS at this site under WA 083RICOA38L, under its RAC EP-S3-07-04. Tetra Tech made significant progress in completing the Phase I RI, as approximately 90% of its work under this WA is complete.

EPA obligated and expects to pay $677,150 for the Phase 1 RI. Of that amount, approximately $50,000 remains to be paid to obtain delivery of the final product, which is approximately 7.4% of the entire work effort. Tetra Tech has completed the Phase 1 field investigation and will submit a draft Phase 1 RI Technical Memorandum no later than June 6, 2020 for EPA review and comment. Tetra Tech must be allowed to complete this work. The Phase 1 RI Technical Memorandum summarizes the findings of the Phase I RI and will inform the next phases of RI fieldwork and will be used to inform the scope of work development for a future, separate task order to complete the remainder of the RI/FS. Tetra Tech will address EPA comments on the draft Phase 1 RI Technical Memorandum, submit a draft final Phase 1 RI Technical Memorandum, and submit a final Phase 1 RI Technical Memorandum.

Summary

Tetra Tech’s work cannot be continued or finished under these RAC WAs, as its RAC will expire on June 6, 2020. For the reasons provided in this Justification, it is in the Government’s best interest to allow Tetra Tech to complete its work.

FAR 16.500(d) requires that architect-engineer services, if being awarded under the FAR 16.5 multiple-award preference procedures, be consistent with subpart 36.6 when placing orders. The “placement of orders [must be] consistent with subpart 36.6.” EPA is transitioning work under the RAC contracts to the new RAF Suite of contracts. EPA has awarded multiple DES contracts using the authority of FAR Part 16.5, and consistent with FAR Part 36.6, including one to Tetra Tech.

EPA believes that finishing this work with Tetra Tech is consistent with the direction given in FAR 16.500(d). It is in EPA’s best interest to use the FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B) sole source exception to the fair opportunity procedures. “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.” Although this is not new work, it is a completion of existing work that is substantially complete; it is unique and specialized to these facts as explained in this Justification.

3. Description of Supplies or Services Required to Meet the Agency’s Needs

As the responsible RAC RI/FS contractor that completed field investigations and prepared draft reports for each site, Tetra Tech is uniquely able to provide services to complete the RI/FS at each of these sites in a timely manner without creating unnecessary delays. The deliverables include, and are limited to, completion of this defined work at these sites:

1. Baghurst Drive: draft final FS Report, final FS Report, and support to EPA during EPA’s preparation of the PRAP and ROD;

2. Old Wilmington Road: draft final FS Report, final FS Report, and support to EPA during EPA’s preparation of the PRAP and ROD;

3. Safety Light: draft final OU2 RI/FS Report, draft final OU3 RI/FS Report, final OU2 RI/FS Report, final OU3 RI/FS Report, and support to EPA during EPA’s preparation of the PRAP(s) and ROD(s) for OU2 and OU3; and

4. Schaffer Equipment: draft final Phase 1 RI Technical Memorandum; final Phase 1 RI Technical Memorandum.

Based on dollars obligated, the estimated aggregate dollar amounts to complete the work at each site will not exceed:

Site Estimate to Complete Baghurst Drive $75,000 Old Wilmington Road $75,000 Safety Light $300,000 Schaffer Equipment $50,000

4. Identification of the Authority Permitting an Exception to the Fair Opportunity Process

The statutory authority permitting exception to fair opportunity relative to this request is 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(1), as implemented by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) paragraph 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B): “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.” No other firm can perform these specific, specialized services as required due to this highly unique requirement under these unique facts.

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

Tetra Tech is uniquely qualified to provide these specific services. At each of these sites, it has completed the field investigation and submitted draft reports. It must now complete and finalize these reports, and provide the associated support during the PRAP and ROD. While all other DES contractors are capable of performing these types of services generally, none have experience at these sites or with these facts so as to not create unacceptable delays in finalizing these draft reports, or be able to provide the associated support during the PRAP and ROD.

Engaging in a competition and potentially allowing any other firm to perform these services for this requirement would harm the Government. As described elsewhere in this document, and below, the risks of increased uncertainties and costs, project delays, and risk of harm to the public and environment are so compelling that having any other contractor perform these services would not be in the Government’s or public’s best interest.

Risk of Increased Cost and Uncertainties

To date, EPA has paid Tetra Tech significant sums under its current RAC WAs:

Site Hours Amount Paid Baghurst Drive 8,191 $1,278,679 Old Wilmington Road 9,820 $1,480,363 Safety Light OU2 6,446 $765,050 Safety Light OU3 9,108 $1,029,760 Schaffer Equipment 5,311 $677,150

There is a certainty of increased costs that EPA will never recoup if this on-going work were stopped and awarded to a different contractor to complete. EPA would be required to pay another firm for additional hours to become familiar with each RI/FS prior to its becoming competent enough to finalize the draft reports and complete the other work described in this Justification.

Based on past experience transitioning sites to new firms, EPA estimates that for each site, a new contractor would require approximately 200 hours, and would invoice approximately $50,000 to review RI data and existing RI/FS reports to become sufficiently familiar with the site to finalize the required reports This is a combined total of 800 hours, and additional combined total cost of $200,000. All of that is in addition to the efforts and costs to complete the reports.

Furthermore, and again, based on past experience, after the new contractors became familiar with their respective site, they will want to provide new, draft reports. Firms typically do not want to assume liability or responsibility for prior firms’ work. This would further increase the costs for completion of the final reports. EPA estimates the new contractors would, per each site, require approximately 300 hours and $75,000 to produce a new draft FS Report. Adding approximately 1,200 hours and $300,000 dollars to complete these reports is not a prudent use of funds.

Therefore, having another contractor besides Tetra Tech perform these services poses a duplication of effort and increased cost. Tetra Tech is already familiar with the RI/FS and has already prepared draft reports, and is days away from submitting the last draft report. Therefore, Tetra Tech will be able to smoothly and efficiently address any of EPA’s comments. As EPA has already paid for most of these services, it is in the Government’s best interest from a cost perspective to complete the work with Tetra Tech.

Risk of Project Delays

Work on completing the final reports would be delayed while a new task order was competed in order to select a new contractor to provide this continuing technical support. These projects are all in critical stages of the clean-up process and, as described above, allowing any delay in implementing the remedies would result in a significant impact to human health and the environment. Therefore, it is important that EPA not have any delays to any of these projects.

Tetra Tech is the only firm that is intimately familiar with the data that was collected during the RI/FS and used to prepare its draft reports. EPA cannot risk losing the time and effort already expended by Tetra Tech. Only Tetra Tech, as the current RI/FS contractor, is capable of understanding and efficiently addressing EPA comments on its draft reports and make any required changes. Tetra Tech would need only to revise its draft reports, without delaying progress at these sites, in order to complete its delivery of the final reports.

In addition to the procurement lead time to procure finalized reports, any other new contractor would require additional time (with associated costs) to become familiar with the RI/FS data, and ask relevant questions. This would include time for such things as reviewing documents, evaluating the draft reports to address EPA comments, or even determining whether the draft reports should be significantly modified or even begin anew. If another contractor were to provide new, draft reports, this would unduly delay the completion of the final reports. Past experience has shown that successor firms do not want to be responsible for another firm’s work, which leads to many changes, some significant enough to be considered new reports, to existing draft documents. In many cases, it would take a new contractor upwards of six months to make revisions and even longer to create completely new draft reports. This would also waste the funding that EPA already paid to Tetra Tech under its RAC contract to reach this stage of completion.

6. Proposed Actions to Overcome Barriers to Competition

The use of this Exception to Fair Opportunity, FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B), is the unavoidable result of EPA’s current requirement for delivery of final RI/FS Reports currently in draft, and almost completed, under separate RAC WAs. All new and future contract requirements at these sites that are not in progress under the existing RAC WAs will be incorporated into a RAF DES Statement of Work with services obtained under Fair Opportunity considerations outlined within the DES contracts. Those requirements will be competed using the fair opportunity procedures under FAR 16.5, giving all multiple awardees the opportunity to be considered.

Notice of this Justification will be published at the Governmentwide Point of Entry (GPE) in accordance with the posting requirements in FAR 5.301(a)(2)(ii) and it will be made publicly available at the GPE.

7. Determination that the anticipated cost to the Government will be fair and reasonable.

The Contracting Officer will negotiate a fair and reasonable price with Tetra Tech. EPA will issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) and request that Tetra Tech submit a technical and price proposal for each of the four sites. A price analysis will be performed by evaluating the price elements in comparison to the Government estimate and data obtained from historical and similar contracts. EPA will evaluate the labor mix proposed, the level of effort (number of hours to perform each task) and other indirect price elements in order to determine a fair and reasonable price. EPA is confident that a fair and reasonable price will be reached with Tetra Tech considering that historically, this Contractor has a record of successful performance under its contracts with the EPA Region 3 for many years at fair and reasonable prices.

8. Additional Supporting Facts

None.

9. The Contracting Officer’s certification that the justification is accurate and complete to the best of the Contracting Officer’s knowledge and belief.

CONTRACTING OFFICER'S CERTIFICATION

In accordance with 16.505(b)(ii)B)(8), I hereby certify that this Justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

_________________________ Date: _________________________ Karyn Price Contracting Officer

10. Written Determination by Approving Official

APPROVAL

I have reviewed these facts and certify that this Justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. I agree that these facts justify the use of the exception to the fair opportunity process, “Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.” FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B). Therefore, under the authority of FAR 16.505(b)(ii)(C)(1), I approve this Justification.

_________________________ Date: ________________________ John Robb Contracting Officer/RAM

5-28-20

05/29/2020

APPROVAL