tf£F
"i-
10019923 pt. 2
Tab
SPONSES TO ADMINISTRATOR'S 3/10/92 REQUEST
FOR ASSESSMENTS OF PROBLEMS RELATED TO
CONTRACT AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
Table of Contents
(updated 4/27/92)
A - Administrator's 3/10/92 Memorandum
- AA/OARM's 3/31/92 Follow-up Memorandum
B - Region I (dated 3/25/92)
— also, followup (dated 4/21/92)
C - Region II (dated 3/27/92)
D - Region III (dated 3/27/92)
E - Region IV (dated 3/26/92)
— also, followup (dated 4/16/92)
F - Region V (dated 3/25/92)
— also, two followups (FAXes dated 4/1/92 and
4/20/92, respectively)
G - Region VI (dated 3/30/92)
— also, followup (dated 4/2/92)
H - Region VII (dated 3/31/92)
— also, followup (dated 4/14/92)
I - Region VIII (dated 3/26/92)
— also, followup (dated 4/1/92)
J - Region IX (dated 3/26/92)
— also, followup (dated 4/16/92)
K - Region X (dated 3/26/92)
L - OSWER (too voluminous; moved to separate binder)
M - OAR (dated 3/31/92)
N - vOPPTS (dated 3/27/92)
— also, followups (dated 4/3/92 and 4/17/92)
O - OW (dated 3/27/92)
\5 — also, followups (dated 4/6/92 and 4/22/92)
- continued -
C-J
CD
O)
CM
-------
- 2 -
P - OPPE (dated 3/31/92)
— also, followup (dated 4/2/92)
Q - ORD (dated 3/27/92)
— also, followup (dated 4/1/92)
R - OARM (dated 4/9/92)
— also, separate responses from OARM's Cincinnati
office (dated 4/3/92) and OARM's RTF office (dated
4/16/92)
S - OIA (dated 3/24/92)
— also, followup (dated 4/13/92)
T - OE (dated 4/3/92)
U - OGC (not yet received by SCCM staff)
V - AO (not yet received by SCCM staff)
W - IG (dated 3/24/92) (but not yet received by SCCM staff)
— also, followup (still being drafted by OIG)
X - OCEPA (dated 3/9/92)
— also, followup (dated 4/2/92)
Y - OCLA (not yet received by SCCM staff)
Z - OROSLR (dated 4/3/92)
NOTE: If you are aware of any inaccuracies in this list, please
contact Michael Northridge, staff, Administrator's Standing
Committee on Contract Management (260-9288).
-------
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF CONTRACT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
OFFICE OF WATER
March 26, 1992
CXJ
CO
CM
-------
-------
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF CONTRACT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
OFFICE OF WATER
INTRODUCTION
On March 2, 1992, the Assistant Administrator for Water
directed that a work group be formed to review Office of Water
(OW) contract and grant management practices and recommend
improvements to these practices where indicated. The work group
is led by an OW SES executive and includes GM-15 level
representatives from all OW offices, OARM, OGC, Region 2 (Water
Management) and Region 3 (Administration). The work group has
not yet completed its activities, but its findings to date are
reflected in this assessment.
REVIEW PROCESS
The work group decided to concentrate first on OW contract
management practices, leaving assessments of grants
administration and Interagency Agreement practices to a second
phase. The work group efforts encompass both headquarters OW
contract management activities and regional office use of OW
contracts.
As a first step, the work group collected basic information
concerning the number and amounts of OW contracts, the number of
contract project officers (POs) and work assignment managers
(WAMs) certified and active in OW, the degree of regional usage
of OW contracts, the degree of usage by Offices outside OW, and a
list of contractors onsite in OW space.
Next, the work group met with senior project officers in
each of the four OW offices to explore (1) how the contract
management process is working in OW, (2) what current or
potential concerns the POs could identify, and (3) what
suggestions the POs had for improvements to the contract process.
The work group solicited similar information from regional office
contract managers and the OARM contract management office in
Cincinnati that handles most OW contracts. A synopsis of these
findings is presented in the next section of this assessment.
-------
GENERAL CONCERNS
The review of contract management practices to date in the
Office of Water and the regional offices that administer tasks
under OW contracts identified the following general concerns:
!• Inadequate Training
o Manager Training
- Presently many OW managers are unfamiliar with contract
procedures and "do's and don'ts" of contracts.
They may put so much pressure on their staff to produce
quick results that the staff feels compelled to cut corners
in the contract process.
o Work Assignment Manager(WAM)/Project Officer (PO) Training
- Focus of present training is not on the day-to-day issues
of WAM/PO responsibilities or the "do's and don'ts" of
contracts management.
2. Onsite Contractors
o In some cases, onsite contractors are not separated from
EPA employees and are not adequately identified as
contractors. People discussing issues with them do not
realize they are contractors, and may divulge inappropriate
information.
o Onsite contractors tend to become "part of the group" and
begin to do tasks that assist the EPA employee. This leads to
potential problems with personal services and/or contractors
carrying out inherently government functions.
o Onsite contractors sometimes attend EPA meetings that are
not directly related to their duties. This may give them an
unfair advantage in subsequent contract competitions.
3. Different Contract and PO Requirements
o Different contracts can have significantly different
requirements. Inattention to or lack of knowledge of these
differences by WAMs can lead to problems, incorrect
information and/or miscommunications.
o Project Officers may impose differing contract management
requirements. Where WAMs work with several POs, they could
have problems in dealing with these different requirements.
-------
4. Personnel Turnover
o This is a major concern at all levels of contracts
management: WAMs, POs, COs and contractors. Rapid personnel
turnover leads to people working on or coordinating projects
for which they have little or no knowledge.
5. Personnel Overload
o The overall OW AC&C budget has increased 62 percent from
FY 1989 to FY 1992, but OW headquarters FTE has increased less
than one percent in that period. Consequently, personnel
resources have not kept up with demand to ensure efficient and
quality management of contracts.
o Management of contract work assignments is often not given
a high priority by supervisors. Such work is often
considered "other duties as assigned" on top of a full load of
other duties.
6. Financial Management Process
o Contractors sometimes submit inadequate information on
payment vouchers or they submit them late.
o Procedures for declaring contract carry-forward funds at the
end of the fiscal year are very time intensive and
inefficient. Corrections are always necessary after actual
year-end costs are determined.
o Contract management procedures are not always aligned with
financial management procedures and vice versa. This can lead
to concerns at the end of the fiscal year, such as IAG funds
that cannot be carried forward, certification of unobligated
AC&C funds, and "banking" of unspent funds.
7. Award Fee
o The intent of an award fee contract is all but defeated in
relatively small contracts. Actual award fees are usually so
restricted in range to be of little incentive to the
contractor. Additionally, the award fee process is so
resource intensive for such a little benefit that no one is
willing to spend the time assessing contractors.
8. Small vs. Large Contracts
o Very large contracts can have major contract management
problems, but so can small ones. Numerous small contracts can
lead to inefficiency, much greater resource demands,
insufficient numbers of knowledgeable POs and WAMs, and
significantly increased workload on COs.
-------
4
9. Regional Use of Headquarters Contracts
o It is common practice for regional offices to assign task
managers to manage OW headquarters contractor activities in the
region that support regional programs. Although this is an
efficient way of using contractors, it can lead to significant
communications problems between the regional task manager and the
headquarters project officer and work assignment manager.
REMEDIAL
In the short term, the Office of Water intends to carry out
the following remedial actions (suggested by POs and others) to
address some of the concerns noted above.
1. SES Meeting
OW will be convening a special meeting of all OW SES
personnel in the near future to discuss their roles in
contracting matters and to explore areas of improvement in OW's
contract management practices.
2. SES Training
All OW SES personnel will attend a special seminar on their
role and responsibilities in contract management by the end of
FY 1992.
3. Contract Management Specialist
A full time contract management specialist will be assigned
to the immediate office of the Assistant Administrator (the
Policy and Resources Management Office) to evaluate and develop
methods to improve OW contract operations.
4 . Contract Management Improvements
OW plans to implement the following improvements in the near
term:
- A more sophisticated contract tracking system, in
concert with the Agency's new Integrated Contract Management
System.
- Improved written procedures for contract processes,
including standardized file formats and checkoff lists for work
assignment managers to assist them in meeting all applicable
requirements .
- Maintenance and regular distribution of lists of
contract do's and don'ts for all OW staff, and
- Assuring adequate training of all staff and managers
involved in contracts management.
-------
Additional recommendations for improvements will derive from
the OW contracts management work group, noted above, that has not
yet finished its activities.
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
APR 6 W92
OFFICE OF
WATER
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Office of Water Contract Management Review
Follow-up Information
FROM: .fl.aJuana S. Wilcher
Assistant Administrator
TO: Christian R. Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator for
Administration and Resources Management
In response to your memorandum of March 31, 1992, I am
submitting the attached partial assessment of contract
management vulnerabilities within the Office of Water (OW)
identified by OIG and our original and updated plan of action
to address these concerns. Additional information on this topic
is being gathered and will be sent to you by April 16, as you
requested.
In addition, I have provided data on OW contracts and
procurement personnel, in response to the last two items
requested in your memorandum.
Attachment
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
-------
OFFICE OF WATER CONTRACTS AND RESOURCES
OFFICE OF WATER TOTALS
Active Contracts 42
Total Contract Value $487.2M
Contracting Officers 0
Project Officers 30
WAMs/DOPOs 181
Legal Staff 0
OFFICE OF WATER IMMEDIATE OFFICE
Active Contracts 0
Contracting Officers 0
Project Officers 0
WAMs/DOPOs 6
Legal Staff 0
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Active Contracts 24
Contracting Officers 0
Project Officers 12
WAMs/DOPOs 51
Legal Staff 0
OFFICE OF GROUND WATER AND DRINKING WATER
Active Contracts 8
Contracting Officers 0
Project Officers 8
WAMs/DOPOs 55
Legal Staff 0
-------
OFFICE OF WETLANDS, OCEANS AND WATERSHEDS
Active Contracts 4
Contracting Officers 0
Project Officers 3
WAMs/DOPOs 26
Legal Staff 0
OFFICE OF WASTEWATER ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE
Active Contracts 6
Contracting Officers 0
Project Officers 4
WAMs/DOPOs 43
Legal Staff 0
-------
OFFICE OF WATER PROGRAM CONTRACTS
01-Apr-92
ow
PROGRAM
OFFICE
OST
TOTAL
VALUE
$211.0
CONTRACTOR
OGDEN ENV & ENERGY SERV
DYNAMAC CORPORATION
ABT ASSOCIATES
ENVIR MANAGEMENT SYST
EASTERN RSCH GROUP
RADIAN CORPORATION
RSCH TRIANGLE INST CORP
VIAR CORPORATION
RADIAN CORPORATION
RADIAN CORPORATION
SCIENCE APPL INT'NL CORP
SCIENCE APPL INT'NL CORP
ABT ASSOCIATES
RADIAN CORPORATION
SCIENCE APPL INT'NL CORP
ANALYTICAL TECH., INC.
S-CUBED
PACIFIC ANALYTICAL, INC.
PACIFIC ANALYTICAL, INC.
MIDWEST RESEARCH INST.
TRIANGLE LABS, INC.
S-CUBED
MIDWEST RESEARCH INST.
ETS ANALYTICAL, INC.
Ktt^wl&wiii»f&3($\
TOTAL
VALUE
$47.9
GEO RESOURCES CONSULT
THE CADMUS GROUP
ECOS
MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC.
WADE MILLER ASSOCIATES
TYPE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
NATURE OF CONTRACT
ANALY, EVAL, COORD & AUTOMATED SUPT SERV
WQ GRIT & STNDS - SLUDGE USE & DISPOSAL
WQ CRIT & STNDS - SLUDGE USE & DISPOSAL
PREP - CRIT DOCUMTS & HEALTH ADVISORIES
DEVEL - CRIT DOCUMTS & HEALTH ADVISORIES
EFFL LIMIT & STNDS-PESTICIDES MANUF IND
EFFL LIMIT & STNDS-CENTRALIZED WASTE TRMT
OPER SAMPLE CNTL CTR, TECH ASSIST&SPEC ANALY
EFFL LIMIT & STNDS-MACHINERY MANUF/REBUILD IND
EFFL LIMIT & STNDS-PULP/PAPER/PHARMACEUTICAL
STAT ANALY-EFFL LIMIT & STNDS-PESTICIDES, OIL
EFFL LIMIT & STNDS-OFFSHORE & COASTAL OIL & GAS
ECON ANALY-EFFL LIMIT &STNDS-PESTICIDES
EFFL LIMIT & STNDS-PESTICIDES PACK & FORMULATE
EFFL LIMIT & STNDS-CENTRALIZED WT & OCPSF IND
ANALY SERV-ANALY OF ORGANICS/MULTI-MEDIA SAMP
ANALY SERV-ANALY OF ORGANICS/MULTI-MEDIA SAMP
ANALY SERV-ANALY OF ORGANICS/MULTI-MEDIA SAMP
ANALY SERV-ANALY OF DIOXINS&FURANS IN MM SAMP
ANALY SERV-ANALY OF DIOXINS&FURANS IN MM SAMP
ANALY SERV-ANALY OF DIOXINS&FURANS IN MM SAMP
ANALY SERV-ANALY OF METALS IN MM SAMPLES
ANALY SERV-ANALY OF METALS IN MM SAMPLES
ANALY SERV-ANALY OF METALS IN MM SAMPLES
DRINKING WATER HOTLINE
ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSES
TECH SUPPORT FOR REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT
EVALUATION OF TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
TECHNICAL SUPPORT FOR OGWDW
TERM
3YR
3YR
3YR
2YR
SYR
4YR
4YR
SYR
4YR
SYR
4YR
SYR
4YR
SYR
SYR
4YR
4YR
4YR
4YR
4YR
4YR
4YR
4YR
4YR
3YR
3YR
SYR
3YR
3YR
EXPIRATION
DATE
JULY 94
DEC. 93
DEC. 93
SEPT 92
JUNE 92
SEPT 92
SEPT 92
SEPT 94
SEPT 94
JUNE 95
SEPT 94
MAY 95
SEPT 94
SEPT 95
JAN 95
SEPT 95
SEPT 95
SEPT 95
SEPT 96
SEPT 96
SEPT 96
SEPT 95
SEPT 95
SEPT 95
SEPT 93
SEPT 92
SEPT 92
SEPT 93
SEPT 93
MAX.
OVERALL
CEILING
(million)
$0.9
3.3
3.0
1.5
3.5
6.4
1.4
19.3
11.7
27.0
12.0
13.3
3.4
10.8
18.4
3.5
6.8
4.4
2.0
2.8
4.6
15.0
18.0
18.0
1.2
4.4
5.6
6.1
5.0
-------
ow
PROGRAM
OFFICE
CONTRACTOR TY
OFFICE OF WATER PROGRAM CONTRACTS
E
PE NATURE OF CONTRACT TERM
1 1
01-Apr-92
iXPIRATION MAX.
DATE OVERALL
CEILING
(million)
IGF LOE HYDROGEOLOGICAL SUPPORT FOR GROUNDWATER 3YR SEPT 93 9.0
THE CADMUS GROUP LOE UNDERGROUND INJECTION CONTROL 4YR SEPT 93 13.8
THE CADMUS GROUP LOE PROGRAM ANALYSES SYR SEPT 94 2.8
QWOW s ,
TOTAL
VALUE
$107.0
QWEC
TOTAL
VALUE
$121.3
BATTELLELABS LOE TECHNICAL SUPPORT SYR SEPT 92 50.0
AMERICAN MANAGEMENT SYST LOE PROGRAM SUPPORT 4 YR SEPT 93 18.0
TETRATECH LOE TECH SUPPORT FOR 301 (h)/403(C) 4 YR SEPT 95 15.0
TETRATECH LOE TECHNICAL SUPPORT 4 YR FEB 93 24.0
VIAR AND COMPANY LOE PROG/OPER/MAINT-PERMIT COMPLIANCE SYST/PCS SYR MAR. 96 5.6
SCIENCE APPL INT'NL CORP LOE WASTEWATER PERMITTING & ENFORCEMENT SYR SEPT 93 81.3
THE CADMUS GROUP LOE WASTEWATER PERMITTING & ENFORCEMENT SYR SEPT 93 30.4
TEMPLE, BARKER & SLOANE LOE EVAL OF ALTER FINANCING METHODS-WQ MGMT SYR SEPT 93 2.0
ENVIR RESOURCE MGT LOE MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER PROGRAM SUPPORT SYR SEPT 92 2.0
-------
- 2 -
4. Personal Services Performed in Violation of FAR
The statement of work (SOW) for the FY 1991 delivery
order was corrected to incorporate the changes
requested by the Alternate Project Officer and to
contain both an informal and formal work request form
for tasks 2 and 5. The formal and informal work
request system forms were incorporated into the FY 1992
SOW.
4/1/92 Update
The formal and informal work request system forms were
also incorporated in the FY 1992 SOW for tasks 3, 4,
and 6 to conform to the Auditor's finding, even though
we disagreed with the finding that the forms were
necessary for these tasks.
Any commendatory letters written in the future will
pertain to the work performed under the contract and
will not mention the names of contractor staff working
on the contract so that it cannot be interpreted that
EPA is being involved in evaluating the contractor's
personnel.
4/1/92 Update
No commendatory letters have been written.
All future deliverables will be received formally from
the prime contractor through the subcontractor
assistant program manager. No introductory or any
other kind of meetings will be held in the future with
contractor management or staff before staff has been
officially assigned to the contract.
4/1/92 Update
Deliverables have been received formally from the prime
contractor through the subcontractor assistant program
manager. No introductory or any other kind of meetings
have been held with contractor management or staff
before staff has been officially assigned to the
contract.
A sign has been placed at the workstation of the onsite
staff indicating his company. He also identifies his
company when he answers the phone.
-------
UPDATE OF CORRECTIVE ACTIONS AS OF 4/1/92
The contract with Computer Sciences Corporation/Network
Management Incorporated for Office of Wastewater Enforcement and
Compliance (OWEC) Office Automation LAN/PC Support was terminated
on March 31, 1992 due to budget cuts. Outlined below is an
update on the corrective actions included in our reply to the
auditors.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS AS OF 1/21/91
Since receiving the preliminary results of the audit, we have
taken or will take the following corrective actions to improve
management of the Delivery Order #119:
1. Delivery Order Preparation
A justification for government furnished property was prepared in
FY 1992 for all government property used by contractor staff.
2. EPA's Monitoring of Delivery Order Was Impaired by
Inadequate Documentation.
The DOPO has taken action to assure monthly reports are timely
and complete. Problems will be referred to contractor management
and the Project and Contract Officers. The contractor has
submitted a draft project plan for FY 1992 based on the Planning
PR which carried forward the correct labor mix. Changes in the
contractor's billing process are beyond the ability of this
Division to assure.
4/1/92 Update
All monthly reports were submitted on time. The final project
plan was not received on time. Although we followed the correct
procedures of referring problems to the contractor management (as
stated above), and got the contracting officer involved in the
process, the plan was delivered 17 days late. Clearly, there are
still problems in this area.
3. Qualifications of Contract Staff
In the future, the DOPO will review the resumes in the project
plan and verify them against the qualifications in the contract.
If the resumes are incomplete, the DOPO will require a complete
resume.
4/1/92 Update
The DOPO reviewed the resumes in the project plan and verified
them against the qualifications in the contract. One person's
education qualifications had previously been waived. The
contracting Officer instructed us that the waivers are being
honored by EPA. All resumes are complete.
-------
-------
-7-
and complete. Problems will be referred to contractor management
and the Project and Contract Officers. The contractor has
submitted a project plan for FY 1992 based on the Planning PR
which carried forward the correct labor mix. Changes in the
contractor's billing process are beyond the ability of this
Division to assure.
3. Qualifications of Contract staff
In the future, the DOPO will review the resumes in the project-
plan and verify them against the qualifications in the contract.
If the resumes are incomplete, the OOPO will require a complete
resume.
4. Personal Services Performed in Violation of FAR
The statement of work for the FY 1991 delivery order was
corrected to incorporate the changes requested by the Alternate
Project Officer and to contain both an informal and formal, work
request form for tasks 2 and 5. The formal and informal work
request system forms were incorporated into the FY 1992 SOW.
Any commendatory letters written in the future will pertain, to
the work performed under the contract and will not mention the
names of contractor staff working on the contract so that it
cannot be interpreted that EPA is being involved in evaluating
the contractor's personnel.
All future deliverables will be received formally from the prime
contractor through the subcontractor assistant program manager.
No introductory or any other kind of meetings will be held in the
future with contractor management or staff before staff has been
officially assigned to the contract.
A sign has been placed at the workstation of the onsite staff
indicating his company. He also identifies his company when he
answers the phone.
5. Unauthorized Training Charges
Our needs have been specified in the FY 1992 Scope of Work. We
will proceed in accordance with the revised User Guide
instructions if future training needs arise.
-------
-6-
Division's mission. MSD's central responsibilities include
stewardship for the State Revolving Fund and Construction Grants
programs. Moreover, no work under this Delivery Order relates to
setting policy, preparing Congressional responses, preparing
testimony or any of the Administrator's Prohibited Activities.
UNAUTHORIZED TRAINING
5. FINDING; EPA paid costs for unauthorized training of
subcontractor staff in FY 1991.
COMMENT; Paragraph 7.3.2 of Attachment A of the Statement
of Work states that "all training shall be paid for by the
contractor unless EPA specifically grants prior approval for
training to meet special needs peculiar to a particular
delivery order." At the time that this training was
approved, the DOPO and Alternate DOPO had been given verbal
authority to approve the training by the APO. The User
Guide used by the auditor contained the erroneous
information that the Contract Officer was the approval
authority. That authority had been delegated to the Project
Officer in a June, 1990 memo from the Contract Officer, but
the User Guide had not been corrected to reflect the change.
Instead, the Project Officer in a July, 1990 memo notified
the DOPOs of the change. In approving this training, the
DOPO determined that the training in question was necessary
to meet the particular needs under the delivery order.
Expertise provided by these courses was not anticipated in
advance when our requirements were conveyed in the SOW. We
discussed the kind of training we planned to provide to the
on-site staff with the APO who agreed that it was within the
scope of paragraph 7.3.2. Both courses were provided by EPA
free of charge. The FY 1992 SOW has been modified to
reflect that the contractor needs expertise in these areas
and will provide the necessary support.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
Since receiving the preliminary results of the audit, we have
taken or will take the following corrective actions to improve
management of the D.O. #119:
1. Delivery Order Preparation
A justification for government furnished property was prepared in
FY 1992 for all government property used by contractor staff,
both onsite and offsite.
2. EPA's Monitoring of Delivery Order Was Impaired by
Inadequate Documentation.
The DOPO has taken action to assure monthly reports are timely
-------
-5-
"Each contract arrangement must be judged in the light
of it own facts and circumstances, the key question
always being: Will the Government exercise relatively
continuous supervision and control over the contractor
personnel performing the contract."
The Position Paper discusses three areas of "supervision" to
support its conclusion.
o EPA gave oral directions to on-site staff.
We agree that this occurred prior to April
1991 for several of the tasks described in
the Statement of Work. In response to the
Alternate Project Officer's technical review
of April 4, 1991, we immediately adopted a
system of formal and informal work request
forms. These procedures, in place since
April, were formally adopted for the 1991
Delivery Order on August 29, 1991, as well as
incorporated into the 1992 Delivery Order.
(The Position paper suggests the procedures
were not introduced until FY 1992.)
o EPA participated in the hiring of a
subcontractor employee. As the Paper
recognizes, while the Alternate DOPO did meet
with one subcontractor employee before he was
hired, she regarded the meeting as an
introductory meeting — not a hiring
interview.
o EPA evaluated subcontractor personnel. EPA
did not evaluate the performance of on-site
staff as is implied in the Position Paper.
The DOPO or alternate DOPO did not routinely
review and comment on the subcontractor's
performance and did not provide the kind of
ongoing feedback normally associated with
supervisor-subordinate relationships.
Speculation by a former employee that the
subcontractor "would have needed input from
the DOPO" and the isolated instance of a
commendatory letter do not indicate in our
view that EPA exercised a supervisory
function on a continuous basis.
We would also like to comment on another major criterion used to
determine whether contractor activities are personal services
under the FAR: "whether such services are applied directly to
the integral effort of the organization in furtherance of its
assigned function or mission". We do not believe that our LAN
system support is an integral part of the Municipal Support
-------
-4-
3C. FINDING: Invoices were erroneous and were late.
COMMENT: We agree that invoices were late. The problem was
brought to the Project Officer's attention. We had also
brought the problem to the attention of the prime and
subcontractor management. As noted above, there was no
adverse impact to the government and all invoices were
approved for payment.
3D. FINDING: The qualifications of two of the personnel
supplied by the subcontractor did not meet contract
requirements.
COMMENT: We agree with this finding. However, no charges
were billed for the Senior LAN Specialist category until
after February 1991, by which time the person had fulfilled
the required number of years of experience. We would like
to note that the Senior LAN Specialist has performed well
and the Government has not been disadvantaged by the
question of the number of years of his experience. Although
the Senior Technical Writer did not graduate from an
accredited four year college as required by the contract, a
waiver from this requirement was granted by the contracting
officer. As to the allegation that some of the services
performed by the Senior Technical Writer were actually those
of a senior word processing operator, we would say that the
services requested in the SOW were adequately and
effectively performed, but they were performed off site so
we had no way of knowing that this was the case.
PERSONAL SERVICES IN VIOLATION OF FAR
4. FINDING: EPA's administration of the delivery order and its
predecessor during FY 1990 and 1991 resulted in a personal
services relationship.
COMMENT: We disagree with this finding. We did not
exercise control over the onsite contract employee, which
includes directing and evaluating his work. It is difficult
given the nature of the support service provided by the
contractor to avoid some oral exchange. Prior to April
1991, we did give oral direction to the subcontractor as
related to several of the tasJcs included in the statement: of
Work. On the other hand, a work request system was in
effect. Under this system, forms were completed requesting
subcontractor support for various applications. EPA did not
act in a supervisory relationship to the subcontractor which
involved hiring, termination, or evaluation of the
subcontractor's performance. Moreover, the services being
performed by the subcontractor were not an integral part: of
the mission of the Municipal Support Division. The Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR) makes it clear that:
-------
-3-
We agree that the December, February and June reports were
submitted late. We agree that financial and staffing
information was missing from the December and January
reports. However, even if the labor mix problem had become
apparent from the December report sometime in January, tb*
issue would not have been solved sooner because we had
already referred the issue to the Project Officer and trh»-
Contracting Officer (in November). This issue was underr
discussion between the Contact Officer/Project Officerrandr
the contractor during the period from November, 1990 toe ,
April, 1991. Following those discussions, the Contracting^
Officer determined that it was correct to fund the
subcontractor management labor categories. In addition,
these categories proved acceptable and did not result in. the
Government paying for any unnecessary costs. The DOPO t-df i
ensure progress reports are submitted in a timely manner- in
the future. (Please see section on "Corrective Actions").
By way of additional explanation, the guidance available-to
OMPC at the time we were modifying the planning PR is
reflected in the November 20, 1990, "Draft Guidance on the
Technical and Operational Support Services Contract." Page
20 of the document provides guidance on the preparation, of
the labor mix and budget. It requires the specification, of
technical labor categories but states that "Other Direct:
Costs" are to be listed as a line item and "Program Support
Labor" is to be calculated as 5.5% of the other two
categories. No subcontractor management labor categories.
were included. We had addressed this issue with the PO and
CO in November and initially were told that costs for
subcontractor management support was already included and. no
subcontractor management labor categories were needed.
35. FINDING: The project plan was almost six months late.
COMMENT; The finding is correct. We denied CSC's request-
for an extension but didn't follow-up aggressively to obtain
the project plan. It was our understanding at the time: that
the requirement for a project plan within ten days of the
receipt of the delivery order did not apply to planning^FRs.
We have since determined that for continuing contracts- from
one year to the next, a new project plan need not be :/0-'--<
developed under a planning PR. The previous project plan; is
sufficient if the work requirements are essentially the? same
as they were in the previous year. We have also since:- "" -
determined that because TOSS was a new contract, a protect
plan should have been submitted under the planning PR* wfcthin
ten days of the receipt of the delivery order. We have?
taken steps to assure that in the future we receive project
plans within ten days of the receipt of delivery orders^..
-------
- 2 -
o It is not clear why the change in labor categories
is cited in this discussion. If the suggestion is
that it is another example of contractor/
subcontractor involvement in the preparation of
the Statement of Work, it is incorrect. When the
planning PR was prepared in August of 1990, it was
on the basis of tentative labor rates and
categories since the new contract had not yet been
signed. We had used a Senior Programmer
previously and continued with that labor category.
The Alternate Project Officer's (APO) memorandum
of October 31, 1990, advised us of the actual
labor categories and rates. On the basis of this,
we reevaluated our needs based on the actual labor
categories and rates. The hourly rates for a
Senior Programmer/Analyst had risen from $27.71 to
$33.60 (See APO's memos of July 6, 1990,
Attachment C and October 31, 1990, page 3). We,
therefore, modified the planning PR to use the LAN
Specialist category for which the rate is $27.42.
EPA'S MONITORING OF DELIVERY ORDER WAS IMPAIRED.
3. FINDING; The contractor was late in providing the project
plan, certain progress reports and the public vouchers.
Lack of timely receipt of these documents prevented the DOPO
from adequately identifying problems with: (1) the labor
mix; and (2) qualifications of the subcontractor's staff.
COMMENT; Detailed comments on each specific finding is
presented below:
3A. FINDING: The subcontractor used staff in three labor
categories that were not authorized until July 1991.
Progress reports were submitted late to the DOPO.
COMMENT; These findings are technically correct. However,
the discussion in the Position Paper would be more balanced
if it gave adequate weight to three circumstances. First,
the planning PR was in place and provided the legal basis
for the contractor to perform work. Second, under the
planning PR arrangement, work is authorized subject to the
availability of funds. Thus, the contractor, not the
Government, bears the risk if the final PR does not ratify
the work already performed. Third, CSC did not bill the.
Agency until after the labor category modification was
approved. The costs proved to be necessary for the
subcontractor to manage and supervise the subcontractor
staff on-site and at NMI.
-------
COMMENTS ON IG POSITION PAPER
ON MANAGEMENT OF
CSC CONTRACT ACTIVITIES
DELIVERY ORDER PREPARATIONS
1. FINDING: A justification for Government furnished property
was not prepared and included in the Delivery Order
procurement package.
COMMENT; our understanding is that EPA has historically
differentiated between equipment furnished to a contractor-
off-site and access to Government property granted to on—
site contractor personnel. Typically, a justification has
not been required in the latter case. We agree that a strict
reading of applicable rules is consistent with the IG's
interpretation of them. We have, therefore, prepared a
justification and had it approved in keeping with the IG
interpretation. (Please see section on "Corrective
Actions").
2. FINDING: Contractor and Subcontractor staff were involved
in preparing the Delivery Order procurement package.
COMMENT; This finding is not accurate. Our requirements
were defined and the procurement packages were prepared by
Office of Municipal Pollution Control (OMPC), now Municipal
Support Division (MSD) personnel. With respect to the
specific events marshalled in support of this conclusion in
the Position Paper;
o The only meeting between the CSC Department
Manager and the Delivery Order Project Officer
(DOPO) and Alternate DOPO took place on June 13,
1991, to discuss the contractor's Draft Project
Plan (workplan) in response to our statement of
Work. The DOPO did consult with on-site
contractor staff about the subcontractor's leave
policy to determine the theoretical work hours-
available in FY 1991. That consultation was
necessary to prepare the estimated budget for/ the
new PR but did not involve allowing the contractor
to assign its own work, the practice prohibited in
the Administrator's "Prohibited Contracting
Activities" No. 10. The CSC Department Manager-
agrees that he did not meet with the DOPO to
develop the Statement of Work or procurement
request (PR), and believes that the Position Paper
misrepresents his statements.
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
I WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
V^**^*
-------
-------
April 1, 1992
to 3/10 Request/Contracts Mgmt.
Ley
Jack Lehman
In response to Christian Holmes' memorandum of March 31,
1992, attached is a copy of our previous response to the
Inspector General for Delivery Order No. 119 under the Technical
Operational Support Services (TOSS) contract as well as an update
on corrective actions we planned to undertake.
In terms of vulnerabilities identified in our contracts
management during the last five years, either through DIG or GAO
audit or through internal control reviews pursuant to FMFIA
requirements, none have been identified for Municipal Support
Division actvities.
Attachments
-------
-------
4/16/92
Additional Information on Vulnerabilities of
OW Contracts Management
In terms of Office of Water (OW) contract management
weaknesses, no "internal control reviews pursuant to FMFIA
requirements" were performed in any of the OW offices during
the last five years. However, the following vulnerabilities
have been identified through some internal agency audits:
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water fOGWDW);
PCMD conducted a review of three Drinking Water contracts
(two of which are existing OGWDW contracts) in May and June 1991.
Two overlying concerns were identified: 1) personal services
and 2) adequate review and documentation of monthly reports
(including invoices) from contractors.
In the case of personal services, action was taken to
immediately terminate all known occurrences of such actions.
Furthermore, OGWDW is in the process of phasing out most onsite
contractors at Headquarters by June 1992 excluding those in the
Docket Canter, Resource Center, and one PC support person.
In terms of the issue of documentation and review of
monthly reports, no specific reports were identified as being
inadequately reviewed. However, to improve the review process,
we initiated an Agency-Level Weakness/Corrective Action that
included critical milestones to eliminating inadequate review
of monthly reports and invoices. We are continuing to evaluate
contracting procedures and are working towards consolidating
and/or centralizing some contracts to ensure more efficient
management. However, based on recent discussions with OW and
Cincinnati (contracts office), it is uncertain whether or not
we will be able to consolidate and centralize contracts because
of the current contracts environment that discourages "large"
contracts. We will continue to coordinate our efforts with OW
and Cincinnati, and any findings of the OW and Agency Workgroups
will also be incorporated into our efforts.
Office of Wetlands. Oceans and Watersheds fOWOW); Program
office management identified in 1990 a need to improve contracts
management procedures to ensure timely funds allocation and
initiation of work assignments, and to enhance contractor
performance. They initiated an Agency-Level Weakness/Corrective
Action that included a milestone to reformat the Office of
Coastal Protection Division's extramural tracking system.
Currently they are in the final stages of implementing the new
system. They will be evaluating the adequacy of the system and
coordinating their efforts with the OW and Agency Workgroups.
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
APR 22 1992
OFFICE OF
WATER
jview - Additional
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: OW Contract Management
Follow-up Information
FROM: LaJuana S. Wilcher
Assistant Administra
TO: Christian R. Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator for
Administration and Resources Management
This is in further response to your memorandum of March 31,
and provides additional information beyond that provided to you
on April 2.
Attached are two additional summaries of Office of Water
contract management vulnerabilities identified by audit reports,
, 1 our corrective actions to date.
No Office of Water contract management vulnerabilities were
identified in any internal control reviews pursuant to FMFIA
requirements during the last five years.
I fully support your efforts to improve the Agency's
contract management operations and hope that the attached
information is helpful in that regard.
Attachment
Printed on RtcycUd Paper
-------
-------
5. Unauthorized Training Charges
Our needs have been specified in the FY 1992 Scope of Work. We
will proceed in accordance with the revised User Guide
instructions if future training needs arise.
4/1/92 Update
No unauthorized training costs have occurred. The contractor
trained their employer in NMl's Certified Systems Administrator
course, but EPA was not charged for the contractor's hours spent
in training, nor did EPA pay for the course. There was no charge
to EPA for the training.
-------
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
MAR 31 1992
OFFICE OF
POLICY, PLANNING AND EVALUATION
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Contract Management in the Office of Policy, Planning and
Evaluation
FROM: Richard D. Morgenstern
Acting Assistant Adminjls£rat'
TO: William K. Reilly
Administrator
This memorandum responds to your March 10 request for my
assessment of current or potential problems relating to contract
management in the Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation (OPPE)
and my plans to address these problems. The memo is organized into
three parts. The first section describes contracting problems for
which OPPE has already taken corrective action; the second section
discusses persisting problems, clear solutions to which have proven
more elusive; and the third section discusses government-wide
contracting issues that underlie many of the problems currently
faced by this Agency.
OPPE has made significant improvements in the quality of
contracts management over the past year due to the collaborative
efforts of OPPE staff and the Contract Management Oversight Group
(CMOG). CMOG was established in May 1991 by the Deputy
Administrator as a result of contract management problems
identified in an Inspector General report issued in June 1990.
CMOG is composed of five members led by a senior Procurement
and Contracts Management Division staff member and is charged with
1) identifying and correcting procedural weaknesses in acquisition
planning and contract management in OPPE and 2) reviewing all
contract documents generated by OPPE before their submission to
PCMD. CMOG reports directly to Dan Esty.
Over the past year, with leadership from Dan and CMOG, OPPE
has focused on providing training and guidance to work assignment
managers; developing a five-year contract acquisition strategy; and
improving contract cost management. The result has been a
heightened appreciation among OPPE managers and staff of the
sensitivities associated with their daily interaction with
contractors and of the vital importance that contract management
skills play in the successful implementation of their programs.
-------
I. Current Contract Management Initiatives
The most significant problems identified in OPPE's use of
contractors were: 1) inappropriate use of on-site contractors, 2)
use of contractors to perform what may border on or be interpreted
as inherently Governmental functions, 3) inadequate attention to
organizational conflict of interest, 4) personal services
relationships between OPPE staff and contractors, and 5)
inadequate cost control. Some of the initiatives undertaken by
CMOG to address these problems include the following:
Training: All OPPE managers and staff have been required to take
a two-day training course developed by CMOG specifically for OPPE.
The course focuses on the role and responsibilities of work
assignment managers and places particular emphasis on ethics,
personal and organizational conflict of interest, "do's and don'ts"
for dealing with prime contractors and subcontractors, and
effective cost management. I consider this training to be the
linchpin for effecting a cultural change in OPPE by raising
awareness of contract management issues and stressing that senior
management will not tolerate the pursuit of technical objectives
at the expense of good contract management.
Guidance: CMOG's physical presence among OPPE's ranks has been a
tremendous help both to new work assignment managers seeking
answers to basic questions on contract management procedures as
well as seasoned managers seeking to ensure the integrity and
effectiveness of contracted activities in their offices. In
addition to maintaining frequent, informal communications with OPPE
staff, CMOG has developed written guidance on issues such as
personal services.
OPPE's experience with CMOG has proven that ready access to
an in-house group of contract management experts who are trained
to identify "beginning of the pipeline" contract issues and prevent
their "mushrooming" into serious management problems may be a more
effective approach to quality assurance than the Agency's
traditional after-the-fact reviews of contract management
practices.
Acquisition Planning: OPPE recently released a five-year
contracting strategy intended to bring continuity and increase
competitiveness to OPPE's contracting. Public release of this
document last month was followed by a meeting at which our program
and contract experts explained details of the plan and answered
questions from vendors. More than 300 contractor representatives
attended the meeting and/or have expressed interest in the five-
year plan.
The development of this plan is a first-time effort for EPA,
and it could serve as a model for other offices. The plan's
release was welcomed by the vendor community, which viewed it as
a sign of OPPE's commitment to bring new blood into its contracting
programs by providing information on procurements well in advance
-------
of the issuance of RFPs. Such advance notice levels the playing
field between incumbents and their competitors by providing ample
time for the development of proposal strategies and reducing the
inherent advantage of incumbents or others perceived as having an
"inside track."
Features of the five-year plan of direct benefit to OPPE
include:
o break out of large mission contracts into more narrowly focused
efforts. The use of more focused statements of work will force
greater accountability at the branch and division levels; result
in smaller, more manageable contracts; and minimize undue reliance
on subcontractors;
o increased emphasis on award fee contracts and other performance
and cost control incentive mechanisms;
o development of alternative contract sources to eliminate
monopolistic control by single contractors;
o use of parallel contracting to create multiple sources of
contractor support, promote continuous competition among
contractors, and direct the award of new work assignments to best
performers; and
o better integration of acquisition, budget and strategic planning
processes.
On-8it« Contractors: Often, when EPA staff and contractors occupy
the same space, the boundaries between these two groups of people
blur and their working relationships may become less than "arms
length." As a result, OPPE required all but essential contractor
employees to vacate Waterside Nail by September 30, 1991. This
resulted in the transfer of virtually all contractor employees to
off-site premises. The two that remain provide technical support
for OPPE computers and are physically segregated from OPPE
employees in a separate computer room.
Total Quality Management: Based on CMOG's recommendations, OPPE has
instituted a number of changes in an effort to streamline the
contract process, remove unnecessary steps and paperwork, and
standardize forms and paper flow. These changes have led to
significant improvements in the turnaround time for processing
contract documents, many of which are time-sensitive.
Increased Fiscal Accountability: Some of OPPE's past contracting
problems stemmed from focusing on contract outputs rather than
financial management of contracts, and lack of attention to cost
issues by OPPE senior managers and work assignment managers.
OPPE's contract training course emphasizes the importance of
negotiating contract work plans and maintaining tight controls over
the expenditure of public funds. These principles are conveyed
through lecture, role playing exercises and mock negotiations.
-------
During the past year, OPPE has overhauled the contract voucher
review process by improving the structure of contractor monthly
progress reports to make them more easily understandable to work
assignment managers and by directly involving work assignment
managers in the voucher review process. All work assignment
managers are currently required to review their portion of costs
billed to the Agency and certify the reasonableness of costs on
projects they oversee before these costs may be reimbursed to the
contractor.
Finally, OPPE has begun work toward establishing on-line
access for all managers to a system that will track contract
expenditures both at the contract and the "macro11 level. This
system will help us minimize end of the fiscal year spending, spot
unobligated commitments, compare contract obligations with outputs
and prevent contract overruns. The system is scheduled to be
operational before the end of the fiscal year.
II. Problems that Pose Continuing Risk* for OPPE and the Agency
In spite of the steps OPPE has taken to improve contract
management, certain problems persist. The most significant
problems and my thoughts on them follow.
Problem i l - staffing shortages in PCMD. Lack of contract support
has, in the past, prevented timely processing of paperwork,
resulting in a tendency for work assignment managers to "cut
corners" and, in some cases, act outside the scope of their
authority, since the establishment of CMOG, the vast majority of
contract paperwork has been processed by CMOG staff without the
need for review by PCMD. I am concerned that OARM may not be
equipped to handle the increased workload from OPPE once CMOG is
disbanded and that contract backlogs will result as we
institutionalize the work of CMOG and return to standard operating
procedures vis-a-vis PCMD.
CMOG will meet with PCMD to discuss alternative solutions to
this problem. One possible solution might be to delegate all or
part of PCMD1s contracting authority to OPPE. Another solution
might be for OARM to house a dedicated contracting officer for OPPE
in Waterside Mall.
Problem # 2 - a continuing perception, in certain quarters of OPPE,
that ensuring good contract management is principally OARM's
responsibility and that OPPE's focus should be limited to
evaluating the technical aspects of contractor performance. In
short, the perception is that OPPE is charged with handling the
"substance" issues, and PCMD is responsible for the "process"
issues. As employees understand that it is everyone's
responsibility to improve contract management throughout the
Agency, I am certain that cultural changes in OPPE will follow.
-------
Problem # 3 - potentially limited interest among staff in
developing contracting expertise. We would like to recruit highly
competent, motivated project officers from within the organization.
We have already taken special measures to ensure that, after CMOG's
departure, a contract management infrastructure is put in place to
provide continuity to our contracts management improvement efforts.
The post-CMOG structure will reside in the Office of Policy
Analysis (OPA). A senior OPA analyst (who also served as a member
of CMOG) will chair a committee of two full-time and ten to twelve
part-time project officers.
Recruiting from within OPPE will be challenging. OPPE
analysts are hired for their technical skills and have, in the
past, been promoted on the basis of their analysis, not their
business acumen. Throughout the course of the past year, I have
emphasized to managers and staff the importance that contract
management skills will play in performance evaluations and
promotion decisions. I am hopeful that the current Agency focus
on contract management and the increased emphasis that I have
placed on contracts in OPPE will create a strong incentive for our
best junior analysts to serve as project officers and, in fact, to
seek out such assignments as key to their professional development.
Your leadership will be essential in instilling such desire in our
employees.
Problem § 4 - lack of accountability in the acquisition process.
Some of OPPE's existing contracts are operating under sole source
extensions which were put in place to avoid lapses in contract
coverage resulting from delays in the submission of paperwork for
new procurements. There were three principle causes for these
delays: 1) decisions on the restructuring of OPPE procurements
that were postponed until completion of the five year acquisition
plan; 2) lack of staff trained in assembling procurement request
packages; and 3) lack of management accountability for individual
procurement actions.
The five year plan includes procedures to trigger development
of new procurement packages well before existing contract periods
of performance are over. Furthermore, CMOG is in the process of
assembling guidance for OPPE staff detailing the "nuts and bolts"
of developing a procurement request package. Consequently, I am
confident that, with appropriate management controls, OPPE will not
face similar potential lapses in contract coverage in the future.
Ill, Gov*rpp>«*pt—vide Contracting Issues
OPPE's continued reliance on contractors to perform sensitive
work and the dual sets of rules governing civil servants and
contractor employees present a continuing risk to the Agency.
OPPE's extramural budget is approximately $25 million per year.
Based on current hourly rates for OPPE contractors, this figure
would translate into a contractor work force of approximately 185,
which represents nearly a 1:1 ratio between OPPE professional staff
and contractor staff. OPPE, like much of EPA, is very highly
-------
leveraged in terms of in-house versus extramural resources. This
reliance stems from the systematic underfunding of our in-house
work force and the ever expanding list of requirements imposed on
us by Congress as well as growing public expectations about EPA and
environmental protection.
OPPE's continuing reliance on contractors may raise questions
concerning our role in the Agency's decision-making processes, our
ability to be the final arbiter of contractor generated analysis,
and the impartiality of judgments to policy recommendations
generated by contractors. In general, EPA's continued heavy
reliance on contractors increases the risk of technical erosion of
the Agency; transfer of the institutional memory from the Agency
to the contractors; and, ultimately, loss of public confidence.
Even the FY 1994 budget guidance encourages us to severely
limit FTE requests in favor of contract dollars. May I point out
that some OPPE contract dollars could be converted to pay for FTE
salaries if OPPE were not subject to an FTE cap. For FY 1994 we
still have the flexibility for a limited base conversion of
contract dollars to salary dollars for FTE, and I recommend you
consider such a strategy Agency-wide for this budget cycle. It
will cost the Agency more only in outlay authority (one-year versus
two-year money) or increased administrative ceiling (in the case
of Superfund).
OPPE has aggressively sought to enforce the principles set
forth in your April 1990 policy statement on contracting (that
lists inherently governmental functions). With CMOG's assistance,
increased scrutiny of work assignment statements of work and
contractor progress reports has minimized the use of contractors
for functions properly performed by Agency staff. Nevertheless,
I am concerned that the written guidance that the Agency has issued
as well as other administrative steps that we might take in the
future may represent little more than band-aid solutions to a more
fundamental issue that has not been addressed.
Better contractor management is necessary, but it is not a
panacea for the systemic problems associated with unrealistic
government personnel ceilings, difficulties in attracting the "best
and the brightest11 to government service, and the push over the
last several White House administrations to contract out all but
essential activities. OPPE and EPA will always need to contract
out work. The issue is not if — but how much — we need to
contract out and where to strike the balance.
I recommend that the Standing Committee on Procurement
currently being established by OARM direct its attention to these
systemic problems as well as to those issues perhaps more easily
addressed. I would be happy to meet with you to elaborate on any
of the matters discussed in this memorandum.
-------
OFFICE OF
AKK U 2 W92 POLICY, PLANNING AND EVALUATION
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Follow-up to the Administrator's March 10, 1992 Request for a
Review of EPA's Contracts Management
FROM: Dan Esty
Deputy AssHtafit Administrator
TO: Christian Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator
for Administration and Resources Management
In order to respond to your memorandum of March 31, 1992,1 would appreciate
receiving from the Procurement and Contracts Management Division (the keeper of
the Agency's official contracts files) information concerning the number, type, dollar
value and purpose of all OPPE contracts and a list of all OPPE certified project officers,
work assignment managers, and delivery order officers. We will review the information
provided to us for accuracy and update it if necessary.
As for the other bullet points, we believe the March 31, 1992 memorandum we
sent to Bill Reilly fully details the vulnerabilities identified by the IG, the corrective
actions and improvements we have made to date and future plans, as well as potential
problems. OARM should also already have detailed records on audit follow-up and
internal control reviews supplied previously by OPPE in its quarterly corrective action
reports and annual FMFIA assurance letter. If we can supplement what has been
previously provided in any way that would be useful to you, please let me know.
cc: F. Henry Habicht
-------
-------
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
MSR 2T 1992
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Management of Extramural Resources
FROM: /rt Erich W. Bretthauer.
Assistant Administrator
for Research andvgevelopment (RD-672)
TO: The Administrator
This is in response to your memorandum of March 10, 1992,
regarding contract management at EPA. As you know, I have been
concerned about how the Office of Research and Development (ORD)
manages not only its extramural but also its intramural
resources. My concern has risen as EPA's environmental research
and development budget has increased during the last several
years to meet the increasing need for better and more timely
environmental data and information.
Nearly all of this increase has been in the research and
development (R&D) account and not in the salary and expense (S&E)
account. At the same time, we have been trying to strengthen our
in-house capability, a need recognized by your Expert Panel.
This has resulted in an increasing demand on current staff to
continue to operate an in-house program and a growing extramural
program.
Recognizing this situation, ORD in its FY 1990 and 1991
Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) reports,
identified contract management as a major weakness. I also
became aware last year of potential problems in some of our
laboratories based on in-house reviews as well as the audits and
investigations being done by the Inspector General.
Last October I created an Acquisition Management Improvement
Initiative and assigned a senior ORD executive, Carl R. Gerber,
to manage that Initiative. The Initiative, which is described in
detail in the attached Prospectus, is examining how ORD currently
is operating its extramural activities and how to improve the
management of our total program. The Initiative will include in-
depth acquisition management discussions at all ORD operating
sites. Our site reviews are being coordinated with the reviews
of the contracting operations being conducted by the Office of
Administration and Resources Management (OARM).
-------
Based on the initial reviews of the Acquisition Management
Improvement Initiative and a briefing by the Inspector General's
office, I have taken a number of actions related to ORD's manage-
ment of extramural resources. These are detailed in two memo-
randa, dated March 16, 1992, to the ORD senior staff, copies of
which are attached for your information.
In addition to these ORD actions, several issues have come
to our attention that fall into OARM's area of responsibility and
I have asked them for their assistance. A copy of that
memorandum is also attached.
Based on our experiences and work in this area to date, I
would like to offer some observations on the overall situation of
the Agency that accounts for some of the problems we face in
acquisition management, as well as other areas:
o Management practices in EPA, particularly of our
extramural resources, have evolved without overall
management or policy direction.
o Responsibility for management of the Agency's resources
is fragmented and the accountability is not clear.
o Lack of clear policy, guidance, and/or communication of
policy and guidance severely hampers day-to-day management.
Chris Holmes' proposal to consolidate all of OARM's
extramural acquisition management functions into one office
reporting to the Assistant Administrator could be an excellent
first step toward developing consistent Agency management of
extramural resources. More important, however, will be how the
new office is organized. We believe it is necessary to include
the current operating units in Cincinnati and RTF in the new
office and to restructure the entire function into a single,
coherent acquisition policy and management structure.
More responsible management of our extramural resources will
require more attention and resources at all levels within EPA.
How many new positions will be required to do this and how much
of this can be accomplished by more efficient use of current
positions is hard to estimate at the present time. In my view,
this can only be addressed, as we are doing it in ORD, by
examining how all our resources (intramural as well as
extramural) are being used.
In light of the initiatives underway and plans of the
Inspector General to audit all ORD contract activities this year,
I do not believe any additional review or study of ORD is needed
at this time.
-------
We in ORD look forward to working with Hank Habicht and
Chris Holmes to ensure not only that ORD1 contract managment, but
also its total management, is second to none.
Attachments
cc: Deputy Administrator
Inspector General
General Counsel
Assistant Administrators
Associate Administrators
Regional Administrators
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
MAR 27 1992 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Management of ORD Extramural Resources
FROM: r. Erich W.
V* Assistant Administrator
for Research andxrjejyelopment (RD-672)
TO: Christian R. Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator
for Administration and Resources Management (PM-208)
To meet the .increasing need for better and more timely
environmental data and information, there has been an increase in
EPA's environmental research and development budget during the
last several years. Nearly all of this increase has been in the
research and development (R&D) account and not in the salary and
expense (S&E) account. This has resulted in an increasing demand
on current staff to continue to operate an in-house program and a
growing extramural program. Recognizing this, the Office of
Research and Development (ORD), in its FY 1990 and 1991 Federal
Managers' Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) reports, identified
contract management as a major weakness.
I also became aware last year of potential problems in some
of our laboratories based on in-house reviews as well as the
audits and investigations being done by the Inspector General.
Last October I created an Acquisition Management Improvement
Initiative and assigned a senior ORD executive, Carl R. Gerber,
to manage that Initiative. The Initiative, which is described in
detail in the attached Prospectus, is examining how ORD currently
is operating its extramural activities and how to improve our
total extramural program. The Initiative will include in depth
acquisition management discussions at all ORD operating sites.
Our site reviews are being coordinated with the reviews being
conducted by your contract operations.
Based on a briefing by the Inspector General's office and
the initial reviews of the Acquisition Management Improvement
Initiative, I have taken a number of actions related to ORD's
management of extramural resources. These are detailed in two
memoranda, dated March 16, 1992, to the ORD senior staff, copies
of which are attached for your information.
-------
In addition to these ORD actions, several issues have come
to our attention that fall into your area of responsibility and
on which I would appreciate your assistance.
1. So that there is no confusion about what is expected of
a contractor, we would like the technical work statement and
management plan contained in, or negotiated during, the best
and final offer to be incorporated in the contract either
directly or by explicit reference.
2. To clarify responsibilities and accountability, we would
like the contracting regulations to explicitly establish
management rules for work assignment managers (WANs) and
delivery order project officers (DOPOs). Official
recognition of these positions and their responsibilities,
particularly those related to the project officer, would
help streamline our operations and reduce the possibility of
confused authority.
3. In order to distinguish between EPA employees and non-
EPA employees in our facilities, we are directing our
laboratories to establish a badging procedure and an office
and laboratory labeling procedure that clearly distinguishes
the difference. In those locations, Cincinnati and RTP,
where there are EPA employees in addition to ORD's staff, we
are leaving to your managers in those locations the respon-
sibility to establish a common method for accomplishing this
goal.
4. There is an urgent need for guidelines from your office
on how the Procurement Integrity Act specifically impacts
ORD managers and scientific personnel.
These issues have emerged during our Offices' joint site visits
and have been discussed with your contracts staffs.
In addition, the reviews have identified several broader,
more generic extramural management issues. In order to develop
specific proposals to address these issues, we are establishing
the following quality action teams on the following topics.
o Contractor support/roles in quality assurance management.
o Staff development and training for managing ORD's
extramural resources.
o Guidelines for competitive cooperate research and
deve1opment agreements.
o Model level-of-effort contract for on-site scientific anu
technical support.
-------
As we establish these QATs, we will work with your staff to
assure their involvement in them.
Our offices' joint site reviews that have been conducted to
date have been exemplary for the professionalism and willingness
of your contracts offices' staff to work with our laboratory
staffs in understanding the types of contracting issues we face
in operating a research and development program. We look forward
to a continued high level of cooperation as we complete the
reviews of all ORD contracting operations.
I am also taking or have taken the following actions to
carry out the directives contained in your February 28, 1992,
memorandum.
1. I appointed Clarence Mahan as ORD's senior procurement
official. He will be assisted in this by Carl R. Gerber,
whom I appointed as ORD's Acquisition Executive last fall.
Carl's assignment is to examine the effectiveness and
integrity of all extramural activities in ORD. This goes
beyond your directive in that we believe it is necessary to
coordinate all extramural activities, not just contracts.
2. We issued an ORD policy directive dated September 24,
1991, that all contractor employees in ORD facilities wear
identification showing they were not a Federal employee.
3. Our laboratories and headquarters groups that have on-
site contractors or cooperators are working to segregate the
work areas, but some of the changes will require renovations
to the existing facilities. We will undertake such
renovations when funds are available after we correct any
health and safety problems we might have.
4. The visits by ORD's Acquisition Management Improvement
team to each ORD site is addressing, in cooperation with
your staff, the type of training that a contractor or
cooperator might receive, how non-EPA individuals are to
identify themselves outside ORD, the types of activities in
which contractors are not to participate, and types of
activities that are or may appear to be personal services.
I also believe that these site visits are playing a major
role in educating all levels of ORD management on the proper
role for Federal employees in managing extramural
activities.
-------
My office is preparing a detailed analysis of the draft
audit report on the Computer Sciences Corporation as it relates
to ORD activities, and it is possible other policy and management
issues requiring separate action may emerge from this analysis.
I would appreciate knowing if there are any other actions
you believe we should undertake at this time.
Attachments
cc: William K. Reilly
F. Henry Habicht II
John C. Martin, IG
Ken Konz, OIG
Edward J. Hanley, OARM
John C. Chamber1in, OA
David J. O'Connor, OA
Harvey G. Pippen, Jr., OA
Mark Kellerman, CI
Michael E. Bower, RTF
Clarence E. Mahan, ORD
Carl R. Gerber, ORD
Belle N. Davis, OA
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
MAR 16 1992
OFFICE OF
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Management of ORD Extramural Resources: Directive
Number 1
FROM: Erich H. Bretthauej
Assistant Adminii
for Research an&^eevdttp^m'ent (RD-672)
tr
TO: ORD Office Directors
To assist in implementing the policies I set in my
memorandum of March 16, 1992, and to address some of the issues
that have emerged from the reviews of EPA contract activities and
the site visits being conducted as part of our Acquisition
Management Improvement Initiative, I am setting the following
policies and directives for ORD.
1. The ORD procedures for competing cooperative agreements
will be reviewed and revised as necessary to assure maximum
national, peer-reviewed competition for environmental
research cooperative agreements in FY 1993. The Director of
the Office of Exploratory Research will chair a Quality
Action Team to design these procedures by May 31, 1992.
2. It is critical that the extramural work we fund,
including the level of effort (LOE) support, be acquired in
the most competitive manner possible and that any appearance
of conflicts of interest be avoided. All existing LOE
contracts that were not initially competed are to be
competed by September 30, 1992; any exception to this
requirement must be specifically approved by the Deputy
Assistant Administrator for Research and Development.
3. To improve the way we deal with the procurement of
contracts, all technical evaluation panels (TEPs) are to
include at least one person from outside the organization
(laboratory or headquarters office) making the award. In
the case of a laboratory, the responsible office director
will appoint the outside member; in the case of an office
contract, the Deputy Assistant Administrator will appoint
the outside member.
-------
In addition to these ORD actions, several issues have come
to our attention that fall into the Office of Administration and
Resources Management's (OAHM) area of responsibility and I am
asking them for their assistance in addressing these issues.
cc: William K. Reilly
F. Henry Habicht II
John C. Martin, IG
Kenneth Konz, OIG
Christian R. Holmes, AA/ARM
Edward J. Hanley, DAA/ARM
John C. Chamber1in, OARM
David J. O'Connor, OARM
Mark Kellerman, OARM/CI
Michael E. Bower, OARM/RTP
ORD Laboratory Directors
Carl R. Gerber, ORD
Belle N. Davis, OARM
Thomas L. Hadd, ORD
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C 20460
OFFICE OF
.' 6 WQ9 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Management of ORD's Resources
FROM: Erich W. Bretthauer
Assistant M
for ReseApatrx5nd'_^^fopment (RD-672)
TO: ORD Office Directors
The last several years have brought about a number of
changes in ORD: core research, infrastructure, science and
technical career ladder, laboratory support. This year we have
moved toward perhaps our most meaningful change, the revisions to
our research planning process. Because of these changes, I think
we have a significant opportunity before us — the opportunity
to rededicate ourselves to providing high-quality scientific
leadership to EPA* s regulatory programs, as well as to further
develop the science and knowledge base needed to understand the
increasingly complex environmental problems of the 1990s.
The research strategies to generate this knowledge base are
currently being developed. Now, we must turn our attention to
the efficient implementation of these important research
strategies. In implementing these plans over the next year, my
goals are for ORD to:
Maintain and enhance outstanding in-house research
efforts; and
Utilize the best research scientists in academic
institutions to augment these in-house efforts.
These issues get at the very heart of how we conduct our
research programs. The Expert Panel on the Role of Science at
EPA addressed both of these concerns in its recent report. In
this memo, I will further elaborate on each of these points and
then discuss the changes I would like to make to accomplish these
goals.
In-House Research Efforts
ORD' s research and development budget has increased in the
last several years to meet the increasing need for better and
more timely environmental data and information. However, much of
-------
this increase has been in extramural funds, rather than for
salaries and expenses. This has resulted in an increasing demand
on current staff to continue to operate an in-house research
program, as well as a growing extramural research program.
Because we have limited FTEs available to do in-house research
and development, it is critical that staff focus on significant,
high-priority areas of science, where the financial investment in
ORD personnel, equipment, and facilities/infrastructure can be
expected to result in significant advances. The changes we are
making in our research planning process now require changes in
the way we conduct our research.
External Scientific Community
I have long been an advocate for the development of long-
term cooperative research and development relationships between
ORD and the external scientific community, particularly the
academic community. This view has recently been reinforced by
the recommendations of the Expert Panel on the Role of Science at
EPA. I believe that such relationships will not only accomplish
the best science possible, but will do so at a reasonable cost.
Level-of-Effort contracts
Excessive reliance on level-of-effort (LOE) support
contracts and on-site cooperative agreements for science,
technical, and analytical services has introduced distortions
into ORD' s environmental research program. I have also become
aware of potential problems in some of our laboratories related
to the LOE contracts. These problems have been highlighted by
in-house reviews, as well as by audits and investigations being
conducted by the Inspector General. The initial results of the
Acquisition Management Improvement Initiative created last fall
have emphasized the need for a new policy, or clarification of
existing policy.
Extramural Resources Policy
In light of these events, and to utilize our extramural
resources more effectively, I am initiating four changes in how
ORD operates:
1. Analysis of Scientific and Technical Priorities; I am
asking each Office Director to undertake an analysis of
the current science program and infrastructure (people,
facilities, equipment) within each laboratory to
determine the scientific and technical area(s) in which
each laboratory could make significant scientific and
technical advances. These analyses, including
priorities if more than one is indicated, should be
completed by April 15, 1992. These analyses will be
carefully reviewed and discussed by ORD senior staff.
-------
Based on these reviews and my decisions, each
laboratory will then develop a plan for future
staffing, facility, and equipment needs required to
maintain or strengthen key areas. These plans will
be developed by August 1, 1992, so that they can be
incorporated into our FY 1994 budget process.
2. Competitive Cooperative Agreements; In FY 1993, I plan
to significantly increase the total allocation of
extramural resources to competitive, off-site
cooperative research agreements, with additional
increases to be planned for future years. I will set
specific targets for each office, recognizing
differences in programs and capabilities, in concert
with individual Office Directors.
3. Level-of-Effort Activities; By the end of FY 1993, the
reliance of ORD on R&D funded LOE contracts and
cooperative agreements, particularly those providing
direct support to the in-house research program, is to
be reduced by at least 35% (using FY 1991 as the base),
with the savings directly allocated to the increased
award of competitive off-site cooperative agreements
and competitive completion form contracts. At this
time, the proposed LOE reduction addresses agreements
funded under the R&D appropriation; funding from the
Superfund Appropriation is not included. Additional
policy guidance regarding use of Superfund resources on
LOE contracts will be issued in the near future.
4. Extramural Support Contracts; It is critical that the
design and conduct of our in-house research and
development activities be totally under the control of
ORD staff. Extramural support to the in-house program
should be limited to conduct of specialized scientific
services (e.g., histopathological analyses to support
ecotoxicology studies) and routine technical tasks and
should not include senior scientific or technical
personnel to perform the role of principal
investigator.
I would like each Office to review its research program and
submit to me by June 1, 1992 a plan for achieving the specific
objectives identified in items 2, 3, and 4 above. The plan
should show the specific actions you plan to take, the timetable
for such actions, any adjustments that my be required in existing
support contracts, and the dollar-level and percent changes from
the FY 1991 base year. Effective planning of these management
reforms can minimize potential disruptions to the ORD research
program and support to ORD client program offices.
-------
I believe these actions are necessary and important steps in
implenenting the recommendations of the Expert Panel, in
addressing the issues being raised through the acquisition
management improvement reviews, and meeting the challenges to
provide more and better science in support of Agency programs.
They will also let us operate more efficiently and build a strong
organizational and programmatic base on which to face the future.
cc: William K. Reilly
F. Henry Habicht II
John C. Martin, Inspector General
Kenneth Konz, OI6
Christian R. Holmes, AA/OARM
Edward J. Hanley, DAA/OARM
John C. Chamber1in, OARM
David J. O' Connor, OARM
Mark KeHerman, OARM/CI
Michael E. Bower, OARM/RTP
ORD Laboratory Directors
Carl R. Gerber, ORD
Belle N. Davis, OARM
Thomas L. Hadd, ORD
-------
C. R. Gerber
3/13/92
Office of Research and Development
Acquisition Management Improvement Initiative (AMII)
PROSPECTUS
I Goals/Purposes
To identify and address ORD acquisition management issues.
To identify the strengths and weaknesses of the various
acquisition management tools (contracts, cooperative
agreements, grants, lAGs, SEES, and IPAs) for conducting
research, development, and other ORD activities.
To recommend the appropriate mix(es) of extramural and
intramural instruments to accomplish programmatic goals most
effectively.
To recommend clarification, improvement, or establishment of
policies and procedures for acquisition management in ORD.
To recommend policy, procedural, organizational, and
management changes to more effectively manage ORD's
activities.
II Approach
An indepth examination of the current use of extramural
resources in carrying out ORD's activities; and the policy
or other issues that need to be addressed to improve
operations.
An examination of how intramural and extramural resources
can be used most effectively to manage research and
development activities; and the ability of various
acquisition mechanisms to achieve most effective use of the
extramural resources.
-------
Ill Method
Develop information through site visits and surveys and
analyses of Agency data and information.
Discuss of acquisition management with similar
organizations, e.g., NASA.
Use quality action teams, where appropriate, to address
identified issues.
Integrate, to the maximum extent possible, the ORD
initiative with related activities in the Agency.
IV Plan and Schedule
o Preparatory Design Phase (November 1991-January 1992)
Review related studies and documents.
Set up system to gather currently available data and
information and update it where necessary.
Design a survey and conduct preliminary site visits.
Set up a coordinated site visit schedule with OARM.
o Design Phase (January-February 1992)
Do final design of the initiative.
Obtain agreement on the initiative and plan from the
Assistant Administrator for Research and Development,
the Office Directors, and the Laboratory Directors.
Based on the preliminary site visits and working with
OARM, establish a standard site visit format.
Develop plans to acquire data not readily available.
Begin or continue work on specific tasks identified.
Set up oversight task force.
o Site Visit Phase (February-October 1992)
Conduct site visits to each ORD acquisitions operation
with independent management authority.
-------
At each site examine the following:
-current practices;
-specific problems that need resolution;
-generic or ORD-wide issues that need to be
addressed;
-need for new or revised policy and/or guidance;
and
-the effectiveness of different types of
approaches and instruments in carrying out
research and development activities.
Assemble and analyze data on the type and use of
instruments used for extramural activities.
o Problem Solving Phase (January 1992- )
As location-specific problems or issues are identified,
either address them on the spot or assign
responsibility for addressing each to an appropriate
manager in the organization.
When generic or broader problems or issues are
identified during site visits or analyses of data,
prepare a draft guidance document for internal ORD
review.
Use quality action teams to handle specific tasks.
o Policy Development Phase (January 1992- )
Develop specific policies or guidance related to ORD
operations and management; and after approval develop
procedures.
Develop overall policy and guidance for ORD operations
and management; and after approval develop necessary
procedures.
Prepare final report to include specific additional
steps and an organizational framework for managing
ORD's acquisitions most effectively.
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
APR I !992
OFFICE OF
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
FROM:
TO:
Follow-up to the Administrator's March 10, 1992 Request
for a Review of EPA's Contracts Management
w. Bretthauec
/Assistant Adminis
for Research a;
velopment (RO-672)
Christian R. Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator
for Administration and Resources Management (PM-208)
In response to your request for detailed information
in your March 31, 1992 memorandum, same subject, I am sure you
are aware that the Office of Administration and Resources
Management (OARM) has primary mission responsibility and is
office of record for much of the information requested in your
memorandum.
The Office of the Comptroller is responsible for Agency-wide
Audit Follow-up activities and should be keeping detailed records
on all audit findings and corrective actions. Likewise, Office
of the Comptroller is responsible for Agency-wide FMFIA and
requires extensive reporting and maintains detailed data on such
actions. In other words, we have already reported this
information to your subordinate offices.
Numbers of contracts, types, purposes, and dollar volume is
information that should be kept by the Office of Procurement and
Contract Management (PCMD) for each EPA office. PCMD should have
this information readily available. Likewise, PCMD is required
to keep a current data base of all project officers. We depend
upon PCMD to provide this information to us.
Would you please reexamine the detailed information request
you have made. If the Comptroller and PCMD cannot provide the
information, as they should be able to, we will work with them to
assemble it. However, we do not want to embark on an unnecessary
effort to gather information that should be maintained by their
offices. If these offices do not have this information, this
would appear to be an internal control problem in itself.
cc: F. Henry Habicht II
Senior Procurement Officers
-------
-------
\ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
I WASHINGTON. D.C 20460
APR i '?'-; OFFICE OF
" " " RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Follow-up to the Administrator's March 10, 1992 Request
for a Review of EPA's Contracts Management
TO:
FROM: yflErich W. Bretthauei>
/Assistant Adminisl
' for Research aiwKpe'velopinent (RD-672)
Christian R. Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator
for Administration and Resources Management (PM-208)
In response to your request for detailed information
in your March 31, 1992 memorandum, same subject, I am sure you
are aware that the Office of Administration and Resources
Management (OARM) has primary mission responsibility and is
office of record for much of the information requested in your
memorandum.
The Office of the Comptroller is responsible for Agency-wide
Audit Follow-up activities and should be keeping detailed records
on all audit findings and corrective actions. Likewise, Office
of the Comptroller is responsible for Agency-wide FMFIA and
requires extensive reporting and maintains detailed data on such
actions. In other words, we have already reported this
information to your subordinate offices.
Numbers of contracts, types, purposes, and dollar volume is
information that should be kept by the Office of Procurement and
Contract Management (PCMD) for each EPA office. PCMD should have
this information readily available. Likewise, PCMD is required
to keep a current data base of all project officers. We depend
upon PCMD to provide this information to us.
Would you please reexamine the detailed information request
you have made. If the Comptroller and PCMD cannot provide the
information, as they should be able to, we will work with them to
assemble it. However, we do not want to embark on an unnecessary
effort to gather information that should be maintained by their
offices. If these offices do not have this information, this
would appear to be an internal control problem in itself.
cc: F. Henry Habicht II
Senior Procurement Officers
-------
-------
-------
-------
322
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION AND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
CINCINNATI. OHIO 45268
April 3, 1992
MEMORANDUM
SUBJ: Strengthening Cincinnati Contracts Management Division
FROM: WillifcrnMTHeriderson, Director
Office of Administration & Resources Management
TO: Christian R. Holmes, Acting Assistant Administrator
Office of Administration & Resources Management
We have recently taken a number of steps to improve the
strength and effectiveness of our Contracts Management Division in
Cincinnati. I would like to share these with you and Ed.
Buildin a Strong
During the past three years, the Contracts Management Division
has had three Acting Division Directors, and two of the three
Branches have had Acting Branch Chiefs. As of January, 1992, all
of these positions have been permanently filled, and we now have a
strong, experienced, well-seasoned management team in place.
o In August, 1991, Mark Kellennan was selected
as Director, CMD. Mark brings 19 years of
experience in managing Department of Defense
Contracts for the Air Force.
o In January, 1992, Robert Edgeton was selected
as Chief, Contract -Management Branch, CMD.
Rob brings almost 20 years of experience in
managing Department of Defense Contracts for
the Army.
Both Mark and Rob have brought new insights and perspectives
from outside of EPA to help improve the overall contract management
program in Cincinnati.
o We have created a Deputy Director position and
selected Marsha Wood. Marsha brings ten years
of experience as an EPA auditor on contract cost
audits. Marsha will oversee day-to-day operational
issues and free up the Division Director to work
with ORD and OW Office and Lab Directors to improve
contract management within their offices.
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
-------
Strengthening the Contract Management Branch
o The Contract Management Branch is being recon-
figured to create two teams with senior team
leaders within the Branch. This will provide
increased day-to-day quality assurance over the
contract management processes, it will also
free up the Branch Chief to dedicate more time
to work with senior program managers in ORD and
OW to improve contract management within the
client program offices.
Last fall, we began a comprehensive on-site
review of each R&D field lab to examine the
current contract management practices under
on-site contracts. These reviews are being
done in conjunction with ORD Office of Program
Management and the cognizant ORD Deputy Office
Director.
A week long, on-site review culminates
in a formal report of findings.
- A corrective action plan for each ORD
Lab will soon be issued.
- Quarterly follow-up monitoring visits
will be made by CMD personnel during
FY 93.
All R&D sites will be completed by
June 30, 1992.
As soon as we finish the review of the R&D labs
at the end of June, we will begin on-site reviews
of our other contracts — OARM, Water, Air, etc.
The on-site reviews will create a baseline
condition of contract management at each site.
Future improvement will be measured from this
baseline.
The on-site reviews will be a permanent part of
our contract management program. We plan on
conducting these reviews at each location every
12-18 months.
Finally, I have had the Contracts Management
Division conduct several MDo's and Don'ts"
briefings for project officers, work assignment
managers, and program managers to convey to them
what is allowable and what is not. These briefings
have set off an incredible amount of discussion
-------
among all involved and greatly increased every-
one's overall awareness of contract management
issues.
ia Procedures
o Each Branch in the Contracts Management Division
has formed Quality Action Teams to evaluate
internal processes relating to contract manage-
ment, with a goal of improving the interface and
teamwork between Contracting Officer and Program
Project Officer. They are currently blueprinting
and examining processes for managing the myriad
contract management functions within their
respective branches.
o Examples of specific improvements we have already
initiated include:
We are requiring project officers to certify
a work assignment checklist which indicates,
among other things, the exact section of the
Statement of Work which authorizes the work
assignment being processed.
For all sole source 8(a) contracts, the program
office must now indicate if there are any
other sole source 8(a) contracts in existence
for the recommended firm or if any are con-
templated.
A policy memo has been sent to our client programs
requiring that all Technical Evaluation Panels
must have a member from outside the program
office in order to assure fairness in the
technical evaluation process and to counter-
balance program familiarity with incumbent
contractors.
The Contracts Management Branch is initiating
a tracking system to keep track of what work
assignments are issued for each contract and
when they are issued.
We have directed that no project officers will
be appointed on any contracts unless they have
already completed the Project Officer and Contract
Administration courses. No waivers will be
given. This will serve to ensure only properly
trained project officers are working on contracts.
Increased Training for Contract Officers and Specialists
o We are developing a remedial training program for
all contract specialists which will require 40
-------
hours of professional training each fiscal year.
This will commence early in FY 93.
o In addition, we will begin training sessions this
spring addressing specific issues such as how to
insure financial integrity under cost reimbursable
contracts.
Resources are Still an Issue
Our workload has grown tremendously without any addition of
resources. The last increase of resources we received was in 1986.
Just this year alone, we have seen a substantial increase in new
contract awards from Ann Arbor due to the Clean Air Act. We have
incurred a substantial, additional contracts workload since October
in support of the new construction planned for Bay City and RTF,
and we are expecting to experience an increase in contract activity
related to the new Headquarters building. Additionally, ORD
received authority to fund lab construction projects under $75,000
with R&D dollars. This will also significantly increase our
workload by up to 30 new procurement actions this year.
All of this is in addition to an existing massive workload.
The Contracts Management Branch (post-award), with only 12 Contract
Specialists, manages 160 active contracts with approximately 2,500
work assignments each fiscal year. These have a value of $1.5
billion. This is an average of 208 work assignments and $125
million in contracts per specialist. The Acquisition Branch (pre-
award), which includes eight specialists, awards approximately 100
new contracts each year with a potential value of $500+ million.
We have coordinated with Dave O'Connor in requesting
additional resources in the 1994 budget and appreciate your support
for this request. Additional resources are absolutely critical to
the future o^ the contract management program in Cincinnati. The
actions we have already taken will solidify and strengthen our
existing operations. With additional resources, we will be able to
rssduce the ttiimber of contracts per specialist, thereby increasing
the amount of time for financial monitoring, cost control, and more
in-depth analysis for each contract than we are capable of doing at
this time.
As a final note, I would like to reassure you that we are
determined and committed to improving the acquisition and
management of our contracts. This obviously will not be
accomplished over night, but I am confident that we are moving
rapidly in the right direction. We welcome your comments or
suggestions you may have for further improvements.
cc: Ed Hanley
Dave O'Connor
-------
-------
3 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
•> ^^M(^^ ,?
V ^ WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES
MEMORANDUM
TO: Christian R. Holmes, Acting Assistant Administrator
Office of Administration and Resources Management
FROM: Tim Atkeson, Assistant Administrator
Office of International Activities
SUBJECT: Contract Administration Training in OIA — Recognition
of Kent Goodger
In keeping with your guidance on contractor management in
EPA, OIA recently sponsored two sessions of the "Contract
Administration for Project Officers" training course for OIA
staff. I would like to commend the Procurement and Contracts
Management Division for the success of these sessions. The
instructor, Kent Goodger, researched OIA's needs and was able to
tailor the course to address areas of specific interest to us.
Attendees from both sessions strongly expressed their
satisfaction with Mr. Goodger's ability to adapt complex subject
matter to international contracting situations.
Because of PCMD's assistance in arranging for these courses,
OIA staff now have a more complete understanding of contract
issues. I believe that this training will help OIA meet the
Agency-wide goals on improved contract management.
cc: David J. O'Connor
Belle Davis
Printed on /tecycfetf Piper
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
APR 9 1992
OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATION
AND RESOURCES
MANAGEMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: OARM's Contract Management Review
FROM: jC-ChristkuiR. Holmes
^ ActingS4ssi*ant Administrator (PM-208)
TO: William K. Reilly
Administrator (A-100)
«
I am providing you my assessment of OARM's present and potential problems in
contract and project management. My role in relation to other Assistant and Regional
Administrators is unique in that I am not only responsible for management of OARM
contracts, but I am also the National Program Manager for contracts management in the
Agency. Therefore, my assessment includes a review of both responsibilities.
As the Agency's Chief Financial Officer, and the Senior Audit Management Official, I
share your concern about the need to strengthen contract management in EPA. Changing
deeply embedded attitudes such as those reported in the Inspector General's reports will
require a long-term effort at all levels of EPA. At the same time, we have an obligation to
act quickly and decisively to correct the real and potential abuses reported by the Inspector
General, or risk the loss of public credibility. Your request for this assessment is a very
positive and timely step towards addressing the issue.
I have summarized both the major contract management vulnerabilities in my Office,
as well as Agency-wide vulnerabilities, together with actions we have taken to correct them.
-------
2
OARM-SPEOFIC CONTRACT VULNERABILITIES
• Vulnerabilities in High-Dollar Volume Multi-Task Delivery Order
Contracts: OARM is responsible for managing support contracts as well as
the Agency's Information Resources Management contracts. These contracts
provide technical and operational support services and products to the entire
Agency. It is a system that allows offices throughout the Agency to access
quickly contractor services. It also has a number of high-dollar volume
contracts in which the management is geographically dispersed.
As you are aware, a recent IG audit has revealed deficiencies in the
management and oversight of these types of contracts. The fragmentation of
responsibilities has led to inadequate monitoring of contractor operations.
• Dependency on a single contractor to maintain mission-critical
management information systems: We have several systems in the Agency,
such as IFMS, which rely heavily on the expertise of a single contractor for
maintenance. This leaves the Agency vulnerable if the contractor can no
longer perform work for us. For example, the proposed notice to debar
American Management Systems, Inc. (AMS), from Federal contracting
activities threatens EPA's ability to assure that IFMS is effectively maintained
until in-house expertise becomes available or a new contractor is brought on
board. Since AMS is a principal supplier of financial and information
management systems for the Federal Government, this could impact many
agencies in addition to EPA.
• Potential use of contractors to perform inherently Governmental functions:
Because of the Agency's heavy reliance on contractors, there is a potential for
contractors to perform inherently Governmental functions. Several audits have
revealed that contractors are performing functions that should be performed by
Government employees. For example, in an audit of the Computer Science
Corporation (CSC), the Inspector General indicated that CSC employees were
performing Governmental functions in half of the delivery orders that they
sampled.
• Government-owned property held by contractors may be at risk: We do
not have assurance that the majority of Government property hi the hands of
contractors are being safeguarded and controlled. In addition, by not approving
or disapproving contractor property control systems, EPA decreased contractor
liability for this property. Internal management reviews and OIG audits cited
the need for a highly reliable and accurate system to account for the wide
variety of items owned by the Agency and held by contractors. Detailed
recordkeeping, information retrieval, and inventory management strategies are
required to maintain integrity of the Agency's property management
-------
For example, Government property furnished to and acquired by CSC was not
properly accounted for or adequately protected. CSC was not legally
authorized to use Government furnished property. In addition, equipment costs
under the contract were not properly justified and excessive costs were incurred
on CSC- leased equipment
Appearance of contractor access to confidential information: Nearly all
EPA data are available to the public upon request Contractors are subject to
careful background checks. To our knowledge, we have never had a case of
unauthorized release by contractor employees. Nonetheless, the Agency must
address the perception of easy access by contractors to sensitive information,
especially given the contractor-dependent environment in which we operate.
Examples where we are particularly vulnerable include insufficient staff to
oversee contractor access.
Complex Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) and EPA Acquisition
Regulations (EPAAR) create potential for misinterpretation: It is important
for EPA managers to understand the FAR and EPAAR to effectively carry out
their fiduciary responsibilities. This is especially underscored by recent audits
and internal management reviews indicating noncompliance that led to
excessive costs incurred by the Government
However complex these regulations may be, we can never allow convenience
and speed to take precedence over procurement regulatory requirements. For
example, the Agency's inattention of the requirements for sole-source
justification led to unnecessary payments of $132,900 that could have been
avoided by procuring directly from commercial vendors.
Potential for Agency managers to assign ADP contract systems oversight to
insufficiently trained personnel: EPA has many employees competent in
information technologies in use in the Agency. However, it lacks a defined set
of criteria to ensure that employees have both technical and contract
management expertise to effectively monitor ADP systems contracts. As a
result, the Agency is vulnerable to deferring inherently Governmental work to
contractors.
AGENCY-WIDE VULNERABILITIES
• Distinction between contractor and EPA employees may become blurred:
The Agency lacks a set of standard management procedures which provide
guidance to EPA personnel on acceptable contractor/Federal employee
relationships. This, coupled with the lack of aggressive oversight of
-------
contractors, has led to situations where there is often no clear distinction
between contractor and OARM employees.
Potential for appearance of conflicts of interest: EPA relies extensively on a
self-certification by contractors to inform us of conflicts of interest OIG
audits have surfaced both organizational and personal conflicts of interest In
particular, these audits cited possible unfair competitive advantage and
impairment of the contractor's objectivity. These include contractor
involvement in the preparation and modification of delivery orders and
statements of work, as well as the tracking of obligations and expenditures.
Possible inadequate contractor financial systems: EPA must pay closer
attention to evaluating contractor financial systems. Agency pre-award audits
do not always flag questionable accounting practices. The Agency needs to
carefully monitor contractors' travel expenses and timekeeping procedures and
evaluate fixed rates for other direct costs, such as computer graphics charges.
Potential exists for POs, DOPOs and WAMs to be designated without
appropriate training. While the Agency has an aggressive training program,
EPA lacks a means to ensure that Agency personnel involved in monitoring
contracts have received appropriate contracts management training, and are
aware of their contract management responsibilities.
Inconsistent award fee ratings categories: The Agency determined that it
needs to ensure that it uses consistent award fee rating categories and that it
provides timely award fee evaluation feedback to the contractors. There is a
potential for paying different award fees to contractors for identical work at the
same level and quality of performance. i
Early warning detection system does not always compel senior
management to take action. Over the years, the Agency's audit management
system and the OIG's list of Potentially Significant Audits in Process have
reflected contract issues. However, the system to provide this early warning
needs to be strengthened to serve the Agency managers better. Currently, they
do not use this intelligence to anticipate problem areas and trends that suggest
systemic weaknesses in their processes nor do they always react in a timely
manner when the information is received.
ACTIONS TAKEN OR PLANNED TO IMPROVE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT
The recent CSC audit served as a wake-up call for the entire Agency to focus on
contract management issues. The message is clear; we cannot allow this situation to continue.
We need to manage contracts by the book. As the Agency's CFO, I made it clear to
-------
Congress that I am the accountable official for correcting contract management problems at
EPA, and I have begun to implement a number of actions. These include:
• On a personal level, I recently visited with management officials in four
regional offices and two field locations. I also joined you in a meeting with
senior managers from Headquarters. As a follow-up to my visits, my Deputy,
Ed Hanley, the Director of Procurement and Contracts Management Division,
Dave O'Connor, and the Director of the Office of Information Resources
Management, Al Pesachowitz, have initiated reviews to assess contracts
management throughout the Agency.
• The Deputy Administrator and I have scheduled a special meeting of the Senior
Council on Management Controls on April 23, 1992 to consider amending the
1991 FMFIA Report to the President and Congress to include contracts
management as a material weakness.
• In early March, I established a Standing Committee on Contracts Management
to oversee EPA's procurement and contracts management functions. The
Committee will conduct a comprehensive review of contracts management in
the Agency.
• Within my own organization, I have also decided to elevate the Agency's
procurement functions by having them report directly to me.
• My office will lead a review of EPA's contracting strategy, including the
degree and the form of our reliance on contractors, and our preference for large
scale, long-term mission contracts. This review is specifically aimed at
examining the design and direction of major procurements now in process.
• I believe that senior-level managers need to participate actively in contract
administration and management if we are to effectively improve our contract
operations. For this reason, I directed each office to designate a Senior
Executive Service (SES) level manager to serve as a "Senior Procurement
Officer" with full responsibility for the integrity of all procurement actions.
• All SES members in EPA must complete a special seminar on their role and
responsibilities in contract management by the end of the fiscal year.
Beginning in October 1992, we will not process procurement actions from
organizations headed by SES members who have not completed this seminar
successfully.
• By June 1992, each office shall review its procedures and policies regarding
contractors to ensure that offices involve contractors only in appropriate work
-------
functions and that they be visibly identified and segregated from EPA
employees.
• I have asked the Agency's senior managers to ensure that contractors do not
participate in EPA events, such as award ceremonies; attend staff meetings;
receive training beyond what is in their contracts; hold positions in which they
can be mistaken for government employees; and perform assignments which
violate the ban on personal services.
• We are reviewing all aspects of the CSC contract and CSC's overall
performance as an EPA contractor, and have begun active negotiations with
CSC to recover monies due the Federal Government We will perform the
same rigorous review of the other contracts if circumstances warrant it
• I have recommended a full-scale application of Total Quality Management
principles to EPA's contracting process in the belief that this offers the best
prospect for a permanent solution to the chronic problem of contracts
management
I have attached the listing of the contracts managed by each OARM office, broken
down according to type of contract, dollar value and purpose. If you have questions or
comments about this information, please call me or have your staff contact my deputy,
Edward J. Hanley, on FTS 260-4600.
Attachments
cc: F. Henry Habicht n
Deputy Administrator
Edward J. Hanley
Deputy Director, OARM
OARM Office Directors
-------
Attachment
-—.:-•- ?---
OARM
CONTRACT SUPPORT
PROGRAM OPERATIONS SUPPORT STAFF
FEBRUARY 1992
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OWCEOF
AOMIHISTRATIOK
AND RESOURCES
MZMDHJUTODM
SUBJECT: OARM Con**ac± Support
FROM: Frederid(ta^rnisfc7T>irector
Program operations Support Staff
TO: Christian Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator
Since you had expressed some interest in finding out what type
of contract support OARM uses, we canvassed the offices and have
attached a list of OARM's major contracts with a description of:
Type of work or product
Approximate annual dollar amount
If work is performed on-sits, etc.
Expected length of the contract
Why a contract is being used rather than EPA employees
for this particular worX or service
Some offices divided their contract dollar amounts between
OARM dollars and Agency dollars, whereas some offices such as the
Management and Organization Division, listed very large contracts
that are used by the entire Agency. The total dollar amount on the
attached list is approximately $208 million. As a point of
reference, last year OARM spent a total of $106.4 million for both
S&E and SF contracts.
Our findings show that approximately 40 percent of our
contract work is performed on-site, 30 percent is performed off-
site, and 30 percent claimed both on-site and off-site. The three
main reasons why contractors were used rather than EPA employees
were: cost effectiveness - 41%, expertise - 26%, and not enough
FTE available - 19% (see attachment A}. An example of a cost-
effective contract would be FMSD's contract with Diplomat Limousine
Associates, which provides shuttle bus service at EPA Headquarters
and allows the Agency greater flexibility to increase and decrease
necessary services. Contractors that were used because of their
expertise are best shewn in contracts held in FMD and OIRM where
Agency employees usually do not have sufficient expertise for ADP
system development, and support, etc. PCMD and M&O both stated
that most of their use of contractors was a result of not having
ftvwtrf on flaeyefcrf Piote
-------
enough FTE to perform necessary jobs.
The Facilities and Management Services Division manages the
largest number of contracts which includes EPA's transportation,
building maintenance,, guard services, recycling programs, etc.
Contracts in OIRM and RTP, although relatively small in number,
also support virtually all Offices, Regions, and laboratories in
the Agency. Some of these services include data and
telecommunications, computing service*, ADP operations end
maintenance support, ADP systems development, library services,
etc.
I hope this information is helpful, please give ne a call on
260-4083 if you have any questions.
Attachments
-------
ATTACHMENT A
OARM CONTRACTS
FY1992
REASON FOR USING
CONTRACTORS
NOT ENOUGH FTE
19%
EXPERTISE
36%
A-76 DICTATES
4%
COST EFFECTIVE
41%
LOCATION OF WORK
PERFORMED
ON-SITE 40%
OFF-SITE 30%
ON-SITE & OFF-SITE
30%
-------
-------
Manor Contracts bv PCMD:
AMS:
Type of Work:
Approximate Annual Amount:
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
CSC:
Type of Work:
Approximate Annual Amount:
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
UNISYS:
Type of Work:
Approximate Annual Amount:
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Management Support Contract for
programming, operations and maintenance
for the ACT system.
$250,000
On-site
5/9/89 to 8/18/92
These contractors are used rather than
EPA employees because there is not
sufficient in-house expertise to do
this work nor is there adequate FTE to
hire people who do.
Technical and Operational Support
services for programming, operations
and maintenance for ACT system.
$450,000
On-site
9/28/90 to 9/30/92 (option to 9/30/95)
These contractors are used rather than
EPA employees .because there is not
sufficient in-house expertise to do
this work nor is there adequate FTE to
hire people who do.
Primary NDPD Support Contract for
PC/LAN satellite support and
operational service agreement for
maintenance and service on PCs.
and LANs.
$150,000
On-site
8/12/87 to 12/31/92
1
-------
Reason for Contract:
These contractors are used rather than
EPA employees"because there is not
sufficient in-house expertise to do this
work nor is there adequate FTE to hire
people who do.
PRIME Computer:
Type of Work:
Approximate Annual Amount:
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
MCI:
Type of Work:
Approximate Annual Amount:
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Hardware maintenance for EPA's PRIME
system.
$80,000
On-site
6/16/89 to 9/30/92
These contractors are used rather than
EPA employees because there is not
sufficient in-house expertise to do this
work nor is there adequate FTE to hire
people who do.
Acquisition and Acquisition-related
training.
$65,000
Off-site
6/16/89 to 9/30/92
These contractors are used rather than
EPA employees because there is not
sufficient in-house expertise to do this
work nor is there adequate FTE to hire
people who do.
-------
Mai or Contracts bv SHEMD;
Booz-Allen & Hamilton - National Technical Assistance Contract:
Type of Work: Provides technical assistance support
in the areas of safety, health, and
environmental management nationwide.
Approximate Annual Amount: OARM: $1.3 million
Pass thru: $1.7 million
AL: $3.0 million
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Kajrrity is off-site, however there are
cur: tly four work assignments which
require on-site personnel (2 at HQ and
2 in field locations)
Current contract expires March 31,
1992. A follow-on contract is in-
process, with a five-year period of
performance, including all options.
Provides technical assistance support
in a variety of professional areas,
such as engineering, industrial
hygiene, training, etc., on an as-
needed basis, to health and safety and
environmental compliance managers
nationwide.
Occu-Health, Inc.
Headquarters Health Unit/Fitness Center:
Type of Work:
Contractor operates Headquarters health
unit and fitness center.
Approximate Annual Amount: $700,000 of OARM funds
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Six month performance period with four
one- year options (April 1991
September 1995)
Contract provides the services of a
physician, nurses, fitness/wellness
professionals. The types and level of
skills required will vary over the life
of the contract; therefore it is more
efficient to contract for these
services than to hire EPA employees
into these positions.
-------
Manor Contracts by GAD;
REA INC.:
Type of Work:
Performs daily operations
Asbestos program for GAD
of the
Approximate Annual Amount: $250,000
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Booz Allen:
Type of Work:
10/1/91 to 9/30/92 (one option year)
The Asbestos in School Hazard Abatement
Act of 1984 was very clear and direct
about funding the administrative part
of the Asbestos program with contractor
support. No resources (except contract
support) was provided to GAD.
Specific tasks designated from the OARM
umbrella.
Approximate Annual Amount: Between $150,000 to $250,000 Superfund
dollars
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Off-site
One year period (May to May)
Superfund FTE Resources in the Regional
Grants Management Offices are scarce.
One of the big recommendations out of
the early Oversite Visits was to
provide the Grants offices with
regional support for state oversight
visits. These reviews would help EPA
limit its vulnerabilities in the states
by assuring that fiscally responsive
administrative systems were present.
Financial integrity would enhance "cost
recovery" and replenish the Trust Fund.
-------
Manor Contracts by M&Q:
Booz-Allen & Hamilton Inc.
General Management Assistance and Advisory Services:
Type of Work: Studies and analyses
Approximate Annual Amount: $4.8 million
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Base period of two option periods
(total of three years) expires 4/6/92
Reason for Contract: M&O does not have enough staff to
perform the work
American Management Systems, Inc.
Resources Management Assistance and Advisory Services:
Type of Work: Studies and analyses related to
resources management
Approximate Annual Amount: $3.5 million
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Base period and two option periods
(total of three years) expires 5/10/92
Reason for Contract: M&O does not have enough staff to
perform this work
American Management systems
Information Management Assistance and Advisory:
Type of Work: Studies and analyses related to
information resources management
Approximate Annual Amount: $3.5 million
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Base period and two option periods
(total of three years( expires 5/18/92
Reason for Contract: M&O does not have enough staff to
perform this work
-------
Advisory and Assistance services for OARM
Type of Work: Studies and analyses except those
related to information resources
management
Approximate Annual Amount: $5 million
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Base period and four option periods
(total of five years) expires 1997
Reason for Contract: M&O does not have enough staff to
perform the work
-------
Manor Contracts by New Headauarters Project:
Type of Work:
Technical and monitoring support
related to OARM contract support, the
following information is provided.
Approximate Annual Amount: $170,000
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Off-site in contractor spaces
Three tear contract including option
years
The contractor provides technical
expertise in a wide variety of
disciplines on an on-demand basis. To
hire architects, engineers cost
estimators, and space planners
permanently would not prove cost
effective nor be responsive to the
taxpayer.
-------
Manor Contracts in FMSD:
Center For Systems and Program Development (CSPD):
Type of Work:
Operation of the Headquarters Building
Services Desk; maintains WSM bulletin
boards; provides conference scheduling,
audio-visual support, and signage
services
Approximate Annual Amount: $562,000
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract: Expires 9/30/92
Reason for Contract:
This contract was streamlined 4/1/91 by
reducing five positions. Total savings
are approximately $65 million for FY91;
and $137 million for FY92.
Diplomat Limousine Associates:
Type of Work:
Provides transportation services at EPA
Headquarters, principally operation of
shuttle buses.
Approximate Annual Amount: $761,500
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
On-site/Off-site
2/1/91 to 2/1/92, with two option years
after this date. Expiration date is
1/31/94.
Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
Diversified Technology & Services of Virginia (DTSV):
Type of Work: Provides operations and maintenance
services at EPA's Las Vegas laboratory.
Approximate Annual Amount: $435,000
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract: FY92 is the base year contract with
four one-year option periods.
8
-------
Reason for Contract:
Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
Dynatrend
Property Management:
Type of Work:
Approximate Annual Amount:
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Dynatrend
Security Services:
Type of Work:
Provides national support to the
property program, including contractor-
held and in-house property.
$872,000
On-site
Extended until 3/31/92; a new contract
will be awarded for April 1, 1992.
Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
Monitoring of the STAY guard force.
The contractor also conducts physical
security reviews and renders technical
assistance Agency-wide. Dynatrend
operates EPA's Emergency Operations
Facility in North Carolina also.
Approximate Annual Amount: $1,320,000
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
On-site/Off-site
Reason for Contract:
Four one-year option periods; contract
expires 9/30/93
Contractors are more c •-••: -effective,
providing greater >__.-_^ility to
increase and decrease services.
Eagle Maintenance Services, Inc.:
Type of Work:
Provides support staff to EPA's
Recycling Program. Activities include
collecting recyclables from all
Headquarters buildings and processing
as mandated.
-------
Approximate Annual Amount: $210,000
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
On-site
Two one-year options; contract expires
9/30/93
Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
Fairfax Opportunities Unlimited
Mail Management:
Type of Work:
Furnishes mail and distribution
services at EPA Headquarters buildings
as well as provides mail management
technical assistance throughout the
Agency.
Approximate Annual Amount: $1,126,000
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Additional Clarifying
Information:
On-site
Three one-year options; expires 9/30/93
Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
In FY92, two new EPA facilities will
increase the contract cost.
Fairfax Opportunities Unlimited
Supply Store:
Type of Work: Operates supply store for EPA
Headquarters. Responsibilities include
assuring sufficient stock levels of
office supplies and forms, conducting
quarterly and yearly inventories, and
processing orders for supplies from GSA
and commercial vendors.
Approximate Annual Amount: $185,100
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract: One-year option period; expires 9/30/92
10
-------
Reason for Contract: Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
General Elevator Company, Inc.:
Type of Work: Maintains and repairs elevators at
Waterside Mall.
Approximate Annual Amount: $217,500
Work performed; On-site
Length of Contract: Three contract options; expires 6/30/93
Reason for Contract: Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
Jewell Cleaning Services, Inc.:
Type of Work: Removal and installation of carpeting;
floor tile at all Headquarters
buildings.
Approximate Annual Amount: $210,000
Work Performed: , On-site
Length of Contract: Three one-year option periods; expires
9/30/92
Reason for Contract: Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
John Chase Architects/Enterprise Advisory Services:
Type of Work: Headquarters space planning and space
utilization services. Indefinite
quantity/indefinite delivery
Approximate Annual Amount: $1,000,000
Work Performed: On-site/Off-site
Length of Contract: FY 1992 option
Reason for Contract: Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
11
-------
Additional Clarifying
Information:
increase and decrease services.
Master space planning implementation
may necessitate staffing increases
during the contract life. a non-
competitive contract extension is
underway and should be effected for 4
1/2 years (10/1/91 - 3/31/96) .
Lam Associates:
Type of Work:
Provides parking management services at
Waterside Mall parking facilities.
Approximate Annual Amount: $296,300
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract: Five-year contract; expires 9/30/95
Reason for Contract:
Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
STAY:
Type of Work: Furnishes guard services for 28 guard
posts and escort services when
requested at Waterside Mall and three
guard posts at Fairchild.
Approximate Annual Amount: $1,616,800 (9 months)
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract: Three one-year options; expires 6/30/92
Reason for Contract: Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
Town Center Management
Parking:
Type of Work:
Provides for renting 167 parking spaces
in the Waterside Mall garage and 42
spaces outside the East Tower entrance.
These spaces are in addition to those
12
-------
provided by the building lease.
Approximate Annual Amount: $298,400
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: One annual option; expires 9/30/92
Reason for Contract:
Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
Town Center Management
Perimeter Guards:
Type of Work:
Approximate Annual Amount:
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
TCM guards patrol the perimeter of the
Waterside Mall complex. The Mall area
is covered from 6:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m.;
the East and West Towers (I Street to M
Street) from 2:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.
Coverage is restricted to Federal
workdays, Monday-Friday.
$162,200
On-site
Three one-year
12/31/93
options; expires
Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
Transcontinental Enterprises, Inc.
Type of Work:
Furnishes labor/moving services
throughout EPA Headquarters; and funds
and operates the Waterside Mall and
Landover warehouses.
Approximate Annual Amount: $2,000,000
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
One-year base contract with five
options; expires 3/1/95
Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
-------
increase and decrease services.
Viking Systems International:
Type of Work: Performs national space planning
services (facility planning policy
assistance, facility and management
tools development).
Approximate Annual Amount: $938,600
Work Performed: Indefinite quantity/indefinite delivery
Length of Contract: Base period is FY 1991 with two annual
options; expires 9/30/93
Reason for Contract: Contractors are more cost-effective,
providing greater flexibility to
increase and decrease services.
-------
Major Contracts in RTF:
NMI systems, Inc.
Voice Telecommunications Support Services:
Type of Work:
Plans, engineers, installs, and
maintains telephone and certain data
communications services in
Headquarters; supports
telecommunications operations at about
60 field sites; and operates the Agency
teleconferencing, facsimile, and secure
communications centers.
Approximate Annual Amount: $5.1 million
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Most of the NMI staff are located in
contractor-leased space in Waterside
Mall. In addition, small staffs are
located in contractor-leased space in
RTP and in EPA space in Philadelphia,
Chicago, and San Francisco.
8/88 through 5/92. A follow-on
contract now in competition is expected
to provide telecommunications services
from award in March 1992 through
September 1999.
EPA management decided in 1981 that the
work-years needed to provide
telecommunications support services
could be provided with greatest cost
effectiveness and flexibility through
contract. The contract for Voice
Telecommunications Support Services is
managed by a federal staff of five and
currently provides about 82 work years
of support in Washington, RTP,
Philadelphia, Chicago, and San
Francisco.
Additional Clarifying
Information:
Both the existing contract and the
soon-to-be-awarded recompetition are
cost-plus-award-fee contracts.
Viar and Company
Technology Planning and Management Corporation:
15
-------
Type of Work:
Information technology architectural
strategy and planning; ADP and
telecommunication feasibility studies,
system designs, system evaluations,
capacity planning: ADP and
telecommunication acquisition support.
The contract also provides short-term
access to acknowledged experts in
various ADP and telecommunication
fields.
Approximate Annual Amount: $8,177,000
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Additional Clarifying
Information:
Primarily at contractor facilities
4/88 through 9/88; four one-year option
periods, FY 89, 90, 91, 92; fifth
option period October 1992 through
March 1993. Expires March 31, 1993, if
all options are exercised.
Government FTEs have not been
available, and contracting as much as
possible has been the policy of former
administrations. ADP has always been
an area targeted for contracting.
Some concern has been expressed in the
past about NDPD's reliance on
contractors for support of IRM
procurements. This contract performs
requirement analysis and RFP
development and provides technical
assistance to technical evaluation
panels.
UNISYS Corporation - Facility Management:
Type of Work:
Responsible for supplying staff
necessary to provide computing and
telecommunication services to the
Agency.
Approximate Annual Amount: $29,959,552
Work Performed: On-site and off-site
Length of Contract:
8/87 through 1992 (includes four one-
year options). Recompete now in
progress will be for 7 years and has a
-------
value of $400 million.
Reason for Contract: No government FTEs have been available,
and contracting as much as possible has
been government policy. Contracting
also provides flexibility that the
civil service system cannot , and
allows us to pay highly skilled people
a competitive salary.
Additional Clarifying
Information: The contract has approximately 450
people managed by 34 government
employees.
CSC Corporation - Supporting NCPD:
Type of Work: The "Technical Support Services
Contract" with CSC supports the mission
of NCPD with the following range of
services:
1. Management Information and
Quality Assurance Support
2. Contract Invoice Processing and
Records Maintenance
3. Superfund Site Specific
Accounting and Documentation
Support
4. Contract Payment System (CPS)
Software Maintenance
5. Contract Obligation Document
Processing
Approximate Annual Amount: FY91 - $1,261,000 (9 months only)
FY92 - $1,784,000 (option period 1)
FY93 - $2,200,000 (option period 2)
FY94 - $2,500,000 (option period 3)
Work Performed: On-site and off-site
Length of Contract: FY91 (9 months only), with three option
years available under the contract
extending services to 9/30/94.
Reason for Contract: No government FTEs have been available
to handle increases in workload
associated with processing contract
invoices and implementing the unique
accounting requirements of the
Superfund Program. Contract support
activities are primarily focused on
12
-------
Additional Clarifying
Information:
data entry, ^document handling and
filing, ADP "software support and
database maintenance.
Contractor workyears for FY92 are
approximately 45, while government FTE
ceiling is 34 positions. Clearly NCPD
could not perform its mission without
substantial contractor support.
Custodial Services:
Type of Work: Custodial services
Approximate Annual Amount: $482,000 yearly costs (OARM $)
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Present contract expires 9/30/92,
Procurement package being readied for
re-compete, one-year contract with 4
option years. Present contract is a
one-year plus 2 option years.
Custodial services have been contracted
out since the early 1970's. All
Facilities contracts (except cafeteria
services) have been either SBA small
business or 8A set aside. In the early
1970's there were no FTE positions
within the Agency to provide the
required services for EPA, RTP to
function in a routine manner.
Contracting out was the only
alternative available.
Security Services:
Type of Work: Physical security for EPA-RTP
Approximate Annual Amount: $762,000 yearly costs (OARM $)
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
On-site and off-site
10/1/91 to 10/1/92 with three option
years
Security services have been contracted
out since the early 1970's. All
Facilities contracts (except cafeteria
18
-------
Cafeteria Services:
Type of Work:
services) have been either SBA small
business or 8A set aside. In the early
1970's there were no FTE positions
within the Agency to provide the
required services for EPA, RTF to
function in a routine manner.
Contracting out was the only
alternative available.
Cafeteria services are provided to 2
EPA cafeteria locations.
Approximate Annual Amount: $50,000 yearly subsidy costs (OARM $)
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract:
Present contract expires 11/15/92.
This ends a 5 year joint cafeteria
services contract with EPA and NIEHS
with both subsidizing equal amounts. A
new procurement is being processed by
NIEHS to re-compete the requirement.
The new requirement will be a 2 year
contract with 3 option years.
Consolidated Services Contract:
Type of Work:
General maintenance services for EPA
facilities and equipment, audio-visual
support, snow removal, shuttle bus
driver, receiving/delivery, supply
store operation, warehouse operation,
mail room operation, duplication
services, in-house moving and data
entry support.
Approximate Annual Amount: $2.8 million (OARM $
remaining 25%)
- 75%, ORD -
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
On-site
Present contract awarded 10/1/92 is a
one year contract with four option
years
All of the listed services have been
contracted out since the early 1970's.
All of the services have been either
SBA small business or 8A set asides.
In the early 1970's there were no FTE
19
-------
positions within the Agency to provide
the required services for EPA, RTF to
function in a routine manner.
Contracting out was the only
alternative available.
Employee Counseling Program:
Type of Work: Employee Counseling for problem
clarification, crisis management, very
short term counseling and referral to
follow-up resources.
Approximate Annual Amount: $21,000
Work performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Five years through FY92
Reason for Contract: Highly specialized expertise required
Physical Fitness Contract:
Type of Work:
Provides and exercise and physical
fitness facility for EPA-RTP employees
Approximate Annual Amount: $100,000 shared between OARM, OAQPS and
ORD. OARM's share is about $17,000.
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contractor:
Off-site
3 years
Highly specialized expertise required
20
-------
Manor Contracts In Cincinnati:
T.B.T. Janitorial:
Type of Work: Janitorial
Approximate Annual Amount: $539,244
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Option 1 - 9/30/92
Option 2 - 9/30/93
Option 3 - 9/30/94
Reason for Contract: Cost effective
Colejon Mechanical Corporation:
Type of Work: Operations, maintenance and repair of
mechanical, electrical and physical
building plant, systems and exterior
building services.
Approximate Annual Amount: $2,000,000
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Option 1 - 9/30/89
Option 2 - 9/30/90
Option 3 - 9/30/91
Option 4 - 9/30/92
Option 5 - 9/30/93
Reason for Contract: Cost-effective
C.I.C.A.
Type of Work: Security guard service
Approximate Annual Amount: $500,000
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Option I - 9/30/92
Option 2 - 9/30/93
Option 3 - 9/30/94
Reason for Contract: Cost-effective
21
-------
Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC):
Type of Work: Computer center operations and National
Telecom Node
Approximate Annual Amount: $652,400 (FY92)
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract: Currently in option year 2 with 3 years
remaining
Reason for Contract: A-76 dictates that we use a contractor
Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC):
Type of Work: ADP support for IRMD
Approximate Annual Amount: $852,000 for FY92
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract: Currently in option year 2, with 3
years remaining.
Reason for Contract: A-76 dictates that we use a contractor
Labat Anderson, Inc.:
Type of Work: Library Support
Approximate Annual Amount: $460,000 for FY92
t
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract: Ongoing
Reason for Contract: A-76 dictates that we use a contractor
Pipkins Group:
Type of Work: Mail delivery and provide personnel for
shipping and receiving
Approximate Annual Amount: $138,457 FY92
$289,379 FY93
$300,961 FY94
$312,948 FY95
22
-------
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Off-site
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
9/30/91
9/30/92
9/30/93
9/30/94
9/30/95
Reason for Contract:
Cost-effective
Dynatrend:
Type of Work:
Approximate Annual Amount;
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Additional Clarifying
Information:
Provide personal property management
support for both contract property
administration and in-house property
administration
$125,000 (OARM)
On-site/Off-site
Expires 3/31/92
Cost-effective
The Cincinnati property management
office has two contract support
personnel. Due to the nature and
complexity of the work, and the small
amount of employees required, the
decision was made to write a work
assignment on the Washington contract
because it would be more beneficial
than writing a new contract for two
positions.
23
-------
Manor Contracts in OIRM:
Technical Operations and Services Support (TOSS)
Type of Work: Indefinite quantity/
delivery
indefinite
Approximate Annual Amount: Expected $60 million OARM is about $10
million
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Additional Clarifying
Information:
On-site/Off-site
All option years, 1995
Allows the Agency to have a contractor
workforce tailored to technology as
requirements change.
TOSS provides ADP operations and
maintenance support services to
relatively all Offices/Regions/
Laboratories in the Agency. It allows
the Agency to use computer technology
to its best advantage. Over 1200 CSC
contractors are provided with this
funding to the Agency.
Mission Oriented Systems Engineering Support (MOSES)
Type of Work: Indefinite quantity/
delivery
indefinite
Approximate Annual Amount: Expected use $15 million per year, OARM
is about $6 million
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Additional Clarifying
Information:
On-site/Off-site
All option years, 1997
Allows the Agency to have a contractor
workforce tailored to technology as
requirements change.
MOSES provides ADP systems development
to most all Headquarters offices. It
allows the Agency to use systems
engineering methods and technology to
its best advantage.
24
-------
Labot-Anderson:
Type of Work:
Indefinite quantity/ indefinite
delivery
Approximate Annual Amount: Past-use $13 million, OARM is about $2
million
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Additional Clarifying
Information:
On-site
All option years, 1993
Allows the Agency to use contractors to
be specialists in library services to
its best advantage, where the
contractor workforce is tailored to
information services as requirements
change.
LAI provides a full range of library,
records management, docket,
clearinghouse support services to the
Headquarters/Regions.
Scientific Automation Services and Laboratory Automation Services
(SAS/LAS) :
Type of Work:
Indefinite quantity/ indefinite
delivery; full range of ADP services to
the Research and Development offices
Approximate Annual Amount: Past use $16 million, OARM is about $1
million
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Additional Clarifying
Information:
On-site
All option years, 1992 (expires in
February, TOSS will replace these
services)
Allows the Agency to have a contractor
workforce tailored to scientific
technology as requirements change
SAS/LAS provides ADP operations and
maintenance support services to the
Laboratories in the Agency. It allows
the Agency to use computer technology
to its best advantage.
25
-------
Vigyan:
Type of Work:
Approximate Annual Amount:
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Additional Clarifying
Information:
Indefinite
delivery
quantity/
indefinite
$3 million, OARM is about $2 million
On-site/Off-site
All option years, 1993
Allows the Agency to have a contractor
workforce tailored to Geographic
Information Systems services as
requirements change.
Vigyan provides a range of ADP systems
development and systems support to the
Headquarters/Regional offices. It
allows the Agency to use contractors in
the specialty area of CIS to its best
advantage
26
-------
Major Contracts in OHRM;
Organizational Dynamics, Inc.
Type of Work: TQM Consultation, Meeting Support,
Training
Approximate Annual Amount: $285,000
Work Performed: On-site/Off-site
Length of Contract: Several years- normally TQM
implementation requires years to
accomplish. Existing contract to print
training materials is for an additional
2 years.
Reason for Contract: The QIB requests their participation at
meetings. Only they can train
facilitators to deliver their
copyrighted materials. Our customers
feel their presence necessary to
properly accomplish their tasks.
Existing training material is licensed
from ODI.
Various Contractors:
Type of Work: Professional meeting space
Approximate Annual Amount: $50,000
Work Performed: On-site/Off-site
Length of Contract: Ongoing
Reason for Contract: no professional meeting space and
support in EPA
Computer Systems Corporation:
Type of Work: Personnel/Payroll data entry
Approximate Annual Amount: $35,000
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract: One year
Reason for Contract: Specific expertise not available at low
cost of contractor
27
-------
Westat, Inc.:
Type of Work:
Conducting a focus group study of EPA's
Internal Communications systems. Ten
focus groups are being conducted at
various EPA locations to gather
feedback from employees on how the
Agency communicates with them and how
internal communications can be
improved.
Approximate Annual Amount: $60,000
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
On-site/Off-site
9/91 to 3/92
Additional Clarifying
Information:
Specific expertise and staff support
not available in-house
The final product will be a
comprehensive report of the focus group
findings. Feedback from the focus
groups will be used by an Agency
workgroup to develop recommendations
for the Administrator and Deputy
Administrator. The contract was
originated by OPPE.
Calvin Woo Associates:
Type of Work:
Developing camera-ready copy of new
recruitment overview and brochures,
advertising collateral, and video in
support of the Academic Relations
Program, general recruitment, and
public information needs.
Approximate Annual Amount: $166,645 - current findings fall
$43,500 short of amount needed to
complete the tasks.
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Off-site
September 1991 to March 1992
Specific expertise in professional
design and marketing services not
available in-house.
28
-------
Organization Development/Effectiveness Master Contract:
Type of Work:
Provides assistance to program Offices
to aid them in their organization
change and development activities and
provides assistance in Team Building,
Strategic Planning, Communications, and
Career Development.
Approximate Annual Amount: No cost to OARM/OHRM unless consulting
service is used by a specific program
office who places delivery orders
through this contract. Annual contract
ceiling is approximately $1 million.
Annual use for a three year Agencywide
total has been approximately $1.5
million. OARM use of this contract
accounted for approximately $150,000 of
this.
Work Performed:
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Virginia Orr Associates:
Type of Work:
On-site/Off-site
Current contract is in its first
extension phase and is expected to be
used through September 1992. A new
competition is being conducted with a
new five year contract expected to be
awarded by the end of September.
Specific expertise and support not
available in-house.
Provides 1400 hours of administration
support for Management Development
Training which is scheduled to train
over 900 incidents of EPA sponsored
management/executive training in 1992.
Provides clerical, data base
design/development/entry; prepares and
receives registration forms and rosters
for each of the 35 sessions; orders
training materials and acts as Hotel
liaison for Program Manager; tracks
payments for vendors; takes course
photos, ; sets up and clears rooms.
Approximate Annual Amount: $20,000
Work Performed:
On-site/Off-site
29
-------
Length of Contract: One year
Reason for Contract: Specific expertise and support not
available in-house at the price of the
contractor.
-------
Manor Contracts in FMD:
Automated Cost Recovery Support:
Type of Work: Software development, Operations
Support and Maintenance for Superfund
Cost Recovery Image Processing System
(SCRIPS) and the Superfund Cost
Organization and Recovery Enhancement
System (SCORES)
Approximate Annual Amount: $1 million
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Contractor support will be needed
indefinitely, although dollar amounts
will decline after FY 1992.
Reason for Contract: Expertise unavailable within OARM
CSC Support:
Type of Work: Nationwide support for preparation of
site-specific cost recovery packages
Approximate Annual Amount: $2.6 million
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract: Delivery orders issued annually;
contractor support will be required
indefinitely
Reason for Contract: Cost beneficial to the Federal
government and decision made not to
invest workyears in this area.
Analytical support for Superfund Fiscal Policy Development
Type of Work: Management analyses of financial
management issues in support of
Superfund fiscal policy development and
cost accounting initiatives
Approximate Annual Amount: $500,000
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Delivery orders typically last 6 months
31
-------
Reason for Contract:
Additional Clarifying
Information:
Contractor support:
Type of Work:
to one year
Expertise unavailable within OARM;
"one-time," short term nature of
projects.
Contract support varies each year
depending on which fiscal policy and
cost accounting issues and initiatives
are undertaken. The management support
contract under which these delivery
orders are issued is currently being
recompeted. Booz, Allen & Hamilton
staff have been reviewing Agency
indemnification of Superfund
contractors, Agency agreements where
PRPs have provided future funding of
Superfund cleanups, and Agency
procedures for assembly of cost
recovery packages. They will be
reporting on their findings and will be
making recommendations on strengthening
our fiscal management procedures and
policies. They are also analyzing and
recommending changes to Superfund
financial guidance prepared for State
assistance recipients.
Payroll data entry
management support
and
records
Approximate Annual Amount: $1,100,000
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract:
Reason for Contract:
Delivery orders issued annually;
contractor support will be required
indefinitely
Cost beneficial to the government and
decisions made not to invest workyears
in this area
Type of Work:
Time-sharing services with Control Data
Corporation in support of mandated
external reporting requirements by OMB
and Treasury.
32
-------
Approximate Annual Amount: $118,000
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Delivery orders issued annually.
Contractor support will be required
until mid FY94
Reason for Contract: In-house capability not available
Additional Clarifying
Information: It is anticipated cnat the Integrated
Financial Management System will have
the applications and reporting
functions capability necessary to
generate reports by mid FY94.
IFMS support:
Type of Work: Software development, operations and
maintenance for the IFMS, ADCB, MARS,
and IFMS system interfaces with other
administrative systems such as EPAYS,
CPS, ADCR, GICS, FMS, RMIS, and CPARS.
Approximate Annual Amount: $1.1 million
Work Performed: Off-site/On-site
Length of Contract: Delivery orders issued annually;
contractor support will be required
indefinitely
Reason for Contract: Expertise and in-house resources
unavailable within OARM
AMS:
Type of Work: Transaction testing for Audit Follow-up
reporting.
.pproximate Annual Amount: $100,000
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Until Expiration of Agency Support
Contract
Reason for Contract: Expertise unavailable within OARM
33
-------
CSC - Audit Management:
v
Type of Work: Operation and Maintenance of MATS
Approximate Annual Amount: $55,000
Work Performed: On-site
Length of Contract: 1992
Reason for Contract: Expertise unavailable within OARM
AMS - Audit Management:
Type of Work: Desk procedures for operation of MATS
and RMO audit management.
Approximate Annual Amount: $75,000
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Duration of Agency Support Contract
Reason for Contract: Expertise unavailable within OARM
Internal Controls:
Type of Work: Upgrade Internal Control Guidebook;
Prepare Internal Control Training
Package
Approximate Annual Amount: $125,000
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Duration of Agency Support Contract
Reason for Contract: Expertise unavailable within OARM
AMS - P3 Analytic Support:
Type of Work: Analytic Support for Environmental
Financing.
Approximate Annual Amount: $300,000
Work Performed: Off-site
Length of Contract: Duration of Agency Support Contract
Reason for Contract: Expertise unavailable within OARM
-------
-------
-------
?z 15:5. EPH osRn D:REC~OR
UMITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Research Triangle Park, NIC 27711
April 16, 1902
office OP
ADMNSTRATION
AND RESOURCES
MANAGEMENT
MEMORANDPM
SUBJECT: Re-direction of FTE to Provide for Contract Management
FROM:
TO:
Willis E. Greenstreet,
Office of Administration and
(MD-20)
ources Management - RTF
Christian R. Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator for Administration and
Resources Management (PM-208)
Edward J. Hanley
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Administration and
Resources Management (PM-208)
Re-direction of FTE within OARM/RTP to meet the requirements
for improved contract management is not praotioal and it would be
illogical due to the existing high contractor/EPA employee ratio
performing our national missions.
In the National Data Processing Division, the entire staff
necessary to provide computing and telecommunication services to
the Agency are provided by a Facilities Management contractor with
approximately 450 contractor personnel managed by 34 government
employees. Within that group, the Architectural Management and
Planning function in NDPD is responsible for the Agency ADP and
telecommunications strategic planning, technology assessment,
managing the Agency information technology architecture and
conducting ADP and telecommunications procurements from
requirements definition through implementation. Current
procurements in process have a total value of over $1 billion.
This function is heavily contractor supported with 11 government
FTE and 28 contractor workyears.
The National Contract Payment Division which is responsible
for payment of all EPA contracts utilizes CSC as a majority of the
support staff, which was criticized in the CSC Audit. CSC
personnel provide management information and quality assurance
support, contract invoice processing and records maintenance,
Superfund site specific accounting and documentation, Contract
Payment System (CPS) software maintenance and contract obligation
-------
document processing. The contractor has a staff of 47 personnel
compared to the EPA staff of 34 FTE.
Within the Facilities Management Division, approximately 120
contractor personnel provide building and building equipment
maintenar.ee, repair, and alteration, warehouse services,
supply/storeroom, security guard force/ reproduction, nail room and
custodial services in support of not only the OARK but also the OAR
and ORD functions in RTP. In-house personnel provide essential
government services such as contract and personal property
management, preparation of Government bills of lading, contract
services Management, and facilities management and planning, to
include the planning for the RTP consolidated facility and planning
for Say City.
In summary, OARM/RTP is heavily leveraged with contractors
performing much of the legitimate support work for the
organization. In fact, the only OARM/RTP functions which are not
heavily contractor supported are the placement and administration
of contracts and small purchases and routine personnel management
functions of recruitment, position management, labor relations and
training. The existing FTE within each of my divisions must remain
in place to perform the inherently governmental functions. This
pre-requisite was highlighted in the recent OIG audit of the
Nationwide esc support contract. Therefore, it would be illogical,
if not impossible, to redirect any of these PTE to the contract
management function in one division, leaving the same void in the
loosing division.
cc: John Barker
Leonard Shen
-------
X08^
^ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 9
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
6 1992
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: ^Review of .Regional Contract Management^VuLner«bi
-------
Headquarters administers. For the national off-site LOE contract
category, we view Headquarters as the appropriate source of
complete information. We recommend sharing a comprehensive list
of all off-site LOE contracts with the Regions, once the
information is available.
Region 9 is taking immediate strides to address our contract
management performance, using the expertise and involve"ant of
contracting staff throughout our office. We are organising an
inter-divisional Quality Action Team (QAT) to address contracting
procedures which will benefit our entire contracting effort. A
second Quality Action Team addressing work assignments for
Alternate Remedial Contracting Strategy contracts has already
begun tackling Superfund-specific issues. We feel that these and
other corrective measures, as outlined in the following pages,
will lead to significant improvements.
However, I continue to be very concerned about the Agency's
and Region 9's ability to effectively manage contracts with
existing levels of management resources. During my last visit to
Headquarters, I discussed with Dave O'Connor the need for
additional contracting resources for Region 9; both for general
contract management and, more specifically, for Superfund
contracting (note: Region 9 is the lead for the Western zone).
We project, based on both current and projected workload in
program contracting needs, an additional nine FTEs are required
for Region 9. Because I am taking my responsibilities as Senior
Procurement Officer for Region 9 very seriously, I feel very
strongly that, with existing resource levels and without adequate
staffing, I am handicapped in managing and addressing the full
spectrum of contract issues.
If you or your staff have any comments or questions
concerning the information that we have provided, please contact
Rich Hennecke, the Regional Management Controls Coordinator, at
(415) 485-1630.
Attachments
-------
ATTACHMENT A
REGION 9 INFORMATION
ON THE VULNERABILITIES
ASSOCIATED WITH
CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
1. VULNERABILITIES IDENTIFIED IN GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING
OFFICE/OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL (GAO/OIG) AUDITS OR
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT REVIEWS
A. OIG AUDIT(S)
1. "EPA's Management of Computer Sciences Corporation
(CSC) Technical Operational Support Services (TOSS)
Contract," Draft Audit No. E1NME1-94-0169.
"In Region 9, the OIG found that we:
(a) administered the CSC contract as a personal services
contract:
The Technical Operational Support Services (TOSS)
Contract is being administered as a personal services
contract; six indicators from the Federal Acquisition
Regulations suggest that a personal services contract
exists between EPA and the Computer Sciences
Corporation (CSC).
Contractor is performing critical functions;
Contractors and EPA staff perform comparable
services;
Contractor employees are supervised by EPA staff;
- Performance on site;
- Tools and equipment furnished by the government;
- The need for the service will last beyond one
year.
Some of the issues raised in this September 1991
draft finding are inherent to the contract (e.g.,
performance on site, equipment furnished, period of
performance) and must be addressed at the national
level.
(i) Critical Services:
Contractors are performing tasks which are critical to
the accomplishment of the missions of the Agency or are
performing functions in key or sensitive areas.
The Region has analyzed the Office of the
Inspector General's (OIG) concern that contractors are
performing in Critical Service capacities. The issue
that contractors are performing critical services also
must be addressed at the national level, although we
-------
have expressed concern that we would not use our
limited Regional funds for services which were
"unimportant".
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN/COMPLETED
We have verified that no services performed by the
contractors are inherently governmental in nature,
which is clearly prohibited from contractor
performance. In addition, EPA personnel in the
Information Resources Management Branch (IRMB) Delivery
Order are required to be knowledgeable of the services
to be provided thereby eliminating the risk that an
essential service would not be accomplished because of
contractor failure to perform. All programming/system
support work performed by CSC contractors must contain
complete documentation thereby reducing/eliminating the
potential for fraud or abuse.
Finally, IRMB does not have any contractors
performing tasks which we consider to be "sensitive" in
nature. However, as we progress toward a totally
automated environment, every activity contributing to
the development and maintenance of the automated system
becomes critical to ensure data and system integrity
regardless of how mundane or routine the activity.
Consequently, the automated system, and management of
it, should contain security measures to ensure that
data entry errors are corrected and system security is
not breached. IRMB has verified that security measures
exist to minimize any risk when contractors perform
tasks in areas which some may consider "sensitive."
(ii) Comparable Services;
EPA staff perform the same or similar tasJcs.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN/COMPLETED
IRMB re-wrote its Statement of Work (SOW) to
clearly state the tasks that contractors will perform
in an effort to define those tasks performed by
contractors. In addition, the TOSS contractors now
have a CSC label placed upon their name plate to
identify them as non-EPA employees. And, we will work
with HQ to ensure that contractors wear badges which
identify them as contractor employees.
fiii) Supervision. Hiring. Promotion & Evaluation of
Contractors;
EPA has performed relatively continuous supervision of
contractors. EPA staff were involved in the hiring,
-------
promotion, and evaluation of contractor employees.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN/COMPLETED
The OIG's concern regarding EPA supervising
contractors has been addressed. The Region has
required improvement and taken measures to avoid this
situation. IRMB has re-written the SOW for its
Delivery Order to ensure that tasks are specific and
easily understandable. The Delivery Order Project
Officer (DOPO) and Alternate DOPOs in this Delivery
Order have received additional training and guidance
regarding their responsibilities. This, coupled with a
new CSC site manager and the improved SOW, has
drastically reduced the occurrence for EPA to be
involved in the work performed by contractor staff and,
therefore, eliminate the possibility of forming an
employer-employee relationship. The Region has also
eliminated contractor attendance at meetings except for
those portions of the meeting where the topics are
directly related to tasks within the SOW. In addition,
guidance has been provided to EPA Regional TOSS
personnel which informs them of appropriate contract
management practices regarding the hiring, promotion,
or evaluation of contractor staff. All personnel
associated with overseeing contractor tasks on the CSC
contract delivery orders have attended the requisite
Contract Administration training course.
fiv) EPA Monitoring Contractor Performance;
Monitoring controls were weakened as a result of the
existing employer-employee relationship. Contractor
labor charges are not independently verified.
Contractor evaluations are not performed. Items
identified in the contractor's monthly progress reports
were outside the SOW. One specific person's time should
not have been billed as direct labor to IRMB's delivery
order. And, there is a lack of communication between
Delivery Order Project Officers and the people
knowledgeable in the contractor's performance.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN/COMPLETED
With respect to these issues, IRMB's re-written
SOW will provide the vehicle for monitoring contractor
performance and the monthly progress report will be
closely reviewed for adherence to the SOW and the
Project Plan. All appropriate contract personnel have
received a copy of the SOW, and will receive a copy of
the Project Plan and monthly Progress Reports.
Monitoring labor charges should not have been an issue
pertaining to the IRMB delivery order. Labor charges
-------
will continue to be monitored in accordance with HQ
guidance. In addition, HQ has stated that independent
maintenance of attendance records is not an appropriate
activity for EPA.personnel. However, because of iRMB's
heightened sensitivity to this issue, informal
contractor time sheets are being reviewed by the
Alternate DOPOs weekly to make sure that time charges
are appropriate.
The OIG raised a concern regarding "outlying"
contractors within the IRMB delivery order and the lack
of communication between the OOPOs and the EPA staff
who have direct knowledge of contractor performance.
IRMB has separated these "outlyers" into their own
delivery orders and appointed Delivery Order Project
Officers for these new delivery orders. This has
reduced the number of contractors working in the IRMB
delivery order, thereby making it more manageable. It
has also allowed EPA staff who are familiar with the
work performed by these outlyers to monitor the
outlyers1 activities.
INCOMPLETE ACTIONS
IRMB has submitted a request to CSC HQ (with a
copy of the request to EPA HQ) to resolve the issue of
inappropriate charges billed to the IRMB delivery
order. Our request asks that the time card charges of
this individual be amended such that the charges are
billed to a Program Management Overhead (PMO) category
and not paid as direct labor to the IRMB delivery
order. CSC is in disagreement with our request,
stating that the labor category previously used is not
an appropriate PMO billable category. The EPA Project
Officer is aware of this issue and IRMB is awaiting
guidance from the Office of Information Resources
Management (OIRM) regarding a possible alternative
course of action.
IRMB believes that on-going activities and
dissemination of information are required to ensure
that EPA will not administer this contract as a
personal services contract. The IRMB Management Analyst
has assumed a lead-role in providing guidance to EPA
TOSS personnel regarding contract issues and
appropriate EPA behavior in an effort to maintain their
awareness of good contract management practices. The
Region is organizing a Quality Action Team (QAT) for
all EPA staff involved in Contract
Management/Oversight. The goal of the QAT is not only
to improve the quality of Regional contract management,
but to foster a changed attitude and perception. We
feel that, except for continuous awareness of, and
-------
training in, appropriate contract practices, the issues
of Critical Services, Comparable Services, Contractor
Supervision, EPA Participation in Hiring, Promotion,
and Evaluation of CSC Employees, and Monitoring of
Contractor's Performance have been fully addressed and
no further action is required in response to the audit
for this delivery order.
(v) Contractor Travel and Training;
There are numerous instances where EPA-approved
contractor travel and training costs were not directly
related to the needs of the delivery order or which
maintained contractor expertise in a specific area.
Also at issue are the hours billed to EPA while
contractors were attending meetings or classes.
CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN/COMPLETED
IRMB will carefully oversee the contractor travel
and training during FY 1992. However, as an immediate
response to concerns regarding travel and training,
IRMB has discontinued the practice of inviting
contractors to attend in-house training in areas which
they are expected to be fully qualified. We have
disallowed the use of our facility for training if its
purpose is unrelated to tasks in the SOW. Finally, we
have made sure that no hours are billed to EPA if the
training or travel is not specifically supported by the
SOW.
(vi) Contractor Personnel and the Earthquake of October
1989;
EPA approved paying for contractor employee's time at
home after the San Francisco Bay Area earthquake of
October 17, 1989.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN/COMPLETED
Authorization to pay contractors during the period
of time contract staff were working at home was
requested of and received from Procurement Contracts
and Management Division (PCMD) at HQ. In addition,
during this time, Region 9 made sure that the time
spent at home by contractor staff was kept to a
minimum. Many contractor employees were relocated to
temporary facilities within a very short period of time
and their skills were utilized to support the Region in
its operations and its many moves. Those contractors
working at home were given tasks to perform, and
therefore were providing the Region with a service.
-------
(b) Contracted Employees Who Did Not Meet Qualification
Requirements.
Region 9 did not .ensure that CSC employee
qualifications comply with contract requirements. Many
of the contractor resumes reviewed by the OIG revealed
that experience or educational requirements were unmet.
Also at issue is the practice of requesting waivers for
contractor employees who do not meet minimum
qualifications.
IRMB has reviewed the resumes and the
qualification requirements of all the contractors
performing in IRMB's delivery order. In addition,
prior to hiring any future contractor employee, IRMB
has implemented procedures to review contractor resumes
for compliance with contract minimum requirement
standards prior to a commitment for employment from
CSC.
INCOMPLETE ACTIONS
IRMB has formally requested that CSC HQ and EPA HQ
take action to reimburse EPA for costs associated with
the nonqualified or misclassified CSC contractor
employees associated with the IRMB delivery order. On
February 7, 1992 a response by CSC-HQ to our request
was received which cited many verbal agreements made
between CSC-HQ and EPA's Contract Officer for the TOSS
Contract. These agreements modified contract
experience and educational requirements and waived
contractor staff into positions. As of this date,
confirmation of these verbal agreements has not been
received by EPA-HQ.
Regarding qualification requirement waivers,
according to guidance received by EPA HQ, waivers of
classification requirements are requested by the
Contractor to the Project Officer in EPA HQ. The
Regional Office does not play a role in requesting or
granting waivers of contract qualification
requirements. Therefore, the Regional Office is not in
a position to discontinue this practice, as recommended
by the OIG.
B. GAO AUDITS
1. An extensive physical search was made of the
Region's audit files, but no relevant reports were
uncovered. Also, the Management Audit Tracking
System (MATS) does not currently contain any
related GAO audit records.
-------
C. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT REVIEWS/INTERNAL CONTROL REVIEWS
In July 1991, a national senior management task force
conducted an Alternate Remedial Contracting Strategy
(ARCS) Management Review in Regions 9 and 10. Region
9 performed a vulnerability analysis of its Superfund
ARCS program as part of that effort. Region 9
responded to the vulnerabilities raised in a report to
the task force, dated August 21, 1991.
INITIATIVES TAKEN
With respect to ARCS administration, the Region is
participating in an equipment warehouse pilot
(Equipment Management Facility, or EMFAC) to reduce
equipment costs and tighten equipment controls. The
EMFAC constitutes an equipment pool for contractors to
share, located at a central warehouse. This project
centralizes equipment procurement, inventory,
scheduling, maintenance, and control functions in one
work assignment with one of our ARCS contractors. The
Region has also formed a Quality Action Team to
streamline the ARCS work assignment process.
The Region has performed a review of its Annual
Assurance Letters and Management Control Plans for the
past five years. There are a number of reviews listed
that relate to periodic performance evaluation board
evaluations of contractor performance. The summaries
of the contractor performance are very voluminous and
have not been reviewed from the perspective of "lessons
learned" by the Agency in its contract management
responsibility. Since the results of the reviews by
the performance evaluation boards are submitted to
PCMD, we request clarification on whether you want this
Region to perform an indepth review of these various
contracts, some of which have expired.
1. The FY 1991 Management Control Plan (MCP) for the
Hazardous Waste Management Division (HWMD) lists
an Internal Control Review (ICR) on Superfund and
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
contracts. They are:
(a) Technical Enforcement Support Performance
Evaluation Board (ICR, 1991).
(b) Alternate Remedial Contracting Strategy
Performance Evaluation Board (ICR, 1991).
(c) Technical Assistance Team Performance Evaluation
Board (biannual) (ICR, 1991).
-------
(d) Emergency Response Cleanup Services Performance
Evaluation Board (biannual) (ICR, 1991).
(e) Review for RCRA Implementation Support Services
Contract (-3/yr) (ICR, 1991) .
(f) Semi-Annval Review for Technical Enforcement
Support Contract (RCRA) (ICR, 1991).
2. The FY 1988 AAL and MCP for HWMD lists the
following reviews on Superfund and RCRA contracts.
They are:
(a) Technical Enforcement Support Performance
Evaluation Board (1988).
(b) REM Contractor Review (Superfund, 1988)
(c) FIT/TAT Contractor Evaluation (1988)
(d) Quarterly Review for Technical Enforcement Support
(TES) (RCRA) Contract (1988).
(e) Quarterly Review for TES (Superfund) Contract
(1988) .
(f) Semiannual Review for Technical Enforcement
Support Contract (RCRA) (ICR, 1991).
-------
INVENTORY of REGION 9 CONTRACTS: ON-SITE
CONTRACT
[and Support Swvferts (TOSS)
FacW8es Management
Regional Delivery Order 345
TYP£
Indefinte quantity/
indefinite delivery
Geographic Information System
Regional Detvery Order 491
Underground Injection Control
Regional DeMvery Order 473
Supcrtund
Regional Defvery Order 69
Emergency Response
Notification System
Regional Detvery Order 474
PURPOSE
Computer Operations
Information Center
Geographic Information System
Data entry and computer
system maintenance for
Human Resources Mgmt Brancr
Data entry and payment voucher
processing for Integrated
Financial Management System
Development of GIS applications
! and databases
UtC data entry and program
irxxfflcations
System development using
FOCUS and Lotus 1-2-3
Graphics Support
Monitoring of emergency cats
Comprehensive data and
system maintenance
R9 EMPLOYEES
VALVE \ASSK3NH? (f)
S47I.3QO
FY-92)
$16.700
(FY-32)
S20.800
(FY-«Z)
$30,000
(FY-92)
$35,eoo
(fY-9£)
7DOPOS
2DOPOS
2DOPOS
2DOPOS
2DOPOS
eg
ni
-------
-------
CONTRACT
|i, TtKS CoWract eoodnued _
Federal insecticide, Fungicide,
andRodenticidcAct
Region* Delivery Ordei 343
FTT5 Program
National Delivery Order 316
Superfund Cost Recovery
National Deivery Order 339
\AJ^*uta»
water
National Deivery Order 260
FINOS
National Delivery Order 320
TYPE
Indefinite quantity/
ndefinrte delivery
^URPOSE
Data management for pesticide
establishment registration
Support for Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rooenucide Act
and Toxic Substances Control
Act tracking system*
Enforcement-related data entry
Creation and maintenance of
Superfund oringinal and site
files
Preparation of cost recovery
packages for negotiation and
ffttgation
Data entry of NPDES effluent
Imits to the Permit Compliance
System and NPUeS compMNHAU
Pieuwitinent inspection tracking
system
Data entry and processing of
Discharge Monitoring Reports
Review of EPA permit application!
in EPA databases
J
VALUE
S2G.OOO
FY-92)
(HQ-Tunded)
(HQ-funded)
(HQ-funded)
i
(HQ-funded)
W EMPLOYEES
$SIGNED(
-------
CONTRACT
CERCLIS
National Delivery Order 285
Docket
National Delivery Order 321
Voice Telecommunications
Regional sub-contract
National Defivery Order 382
TYPE
PURPOSE
Indefinite Quantity/
iidefinite delivery
System administration and data
entry for Supertumf computer
systems
Printer servicing
Generation of reports
(Cost reimbursable
SftE
Regional Deivery Order
Superiund
Regional Delivery Order
Potation Prevention
Regional Def very Order
Indefinite quantity/
indefinite deivery
(Maintenance of the regional
docket lot trie Office of
Enforcement
Phono system InstaMation
and enhancements
$56,400
Lab aupport and ojuafty
assurance
Perform
i of library services
Delivery of Superfund related
information services
Deivery of Pollution Prevention
related information services
VALUE
EPA LUPLOYEES
ASSIGNED (*)
(HQ-fumfed)
1DOPO
(HCMunded)
1OOPO
37 positions
(HQ and Refunded)
$289.327
hduded
above
Included
above
1DOPO
IPO
5 Task Monitors
ZDOPOs
2DOPOS
2DOPO6
Q
O
65
-------
CONTRACT
3. LabM Aru^aort Inc. Coritmct
*0riGn**- $ji ;• l;^&% ^ ^
Superfund
National Delivery Order
SuperTund
National Delivery Order
RCRA
Regional Delivery Order
Ji\^JfiliWVift4tfi^*IftH^M*^d4&U4klftl4H^ **'
^isftUAfeAMflV y ( »> * X**
\fvf^rnSfv t $. r **
Hi— it*>jmi tAf«uA«
FMuionfti wonc
Asslgnmeni R204
Nttttonol Work
Asaignrnenl R2933
^Siydirot^*! ft^fcfi-
lp«3CRpiB|iil^^!p"H';*if;W;;:
lMi^^imi*'i%"'H^::/-:
TYPE
Indefinite quantity/
Indefinite delivery
Fixed price
Cost reimbursable
f^r—t mhrrfiia'^ilUlt
IsUSl icnimna<«UR;
Fixed price
(through S8A)
«/RPOSE
Preparation of a Superfund
information directory
Superfund Records Center
maintenance
Lixary's maintenance of
Part A files
Staffing liilumiaUmi
Notification Lne
Assignment 01 EPA id. Numbers
Providing UST/LUST guMetnes
to Native Arnencaii constiueiils
and litigation services
EmrJence auditing for
Superfund
Supply room operation
Shippiig/receiving mal
Photocopy services
Conference Ceiiiei set-up
VALUE 1
$15,000
(FY-92)
$1^93^14
(FY-92)
$60,000
$280,000
(FY-92)
$200,000
(FY-9EJ
*3o,OOO,OOv
(funded nationally
tfiruNEIC)
$313,740
R9 EMPLOYEES
ASSIGNED (/)
1 OOP-)
t ADOPO
tPO
1DOPO
1WAM
1 WAV
NEIC PO
IPO
I
18
C9
Q
m
-------
INVENTORY of REGION 9 CONTRACTS: OFF-SITE
CONTRACT
TYPE
Cost relmborsaWe
_; , :
Cost referbirsaMe
Cost reimbursable
Cost refmbursaWe
Cost reimbursable
Cost reimbursable
Cost reimbursable
Cost reimbursable
Fixed price
PURPOSE
Remedial work
Rernedtaf work
Remedial work
Remedial work
Remedial work
Remedial work
Emergency removed &
sttectean-up
TechrtcaVHtigation support
at StrtngfeHow
Removal action at
Biuewater
VALUE
$267,795,372
(780.000 hours)
5279.757,767
(780,000 hours)
574,588,698
(200,000 hours)
$286,760,199
(780,000 hours)
$270.527,172
(780,000 hours)
$71,237,382
(700.000 hours)
$59,681.813
$200,000
$227,937
R9 EMPLOYEES
ASSIGNED (*)
1 CO, 1 PO
14 WAMs
1CO-1 PO
14 W Vis
1 CO, 1 PO
14WAMS
1 CO, 1 PO
12WAM3
1 CO. 1 PO
2WAMS
1 CO, IPO
9WAMa
1CO
1 WAM
1CO
1 WAM
1 CO
1 WAM
-------
CONTRACT
^SSSSSSi ., ,/
^sssy^^...
H&8G&i&:'r£'i:'i':$' • • .
[nu0Mijii( niiiit.iiit j. .;!;.'!'... .. '.'
£398301^:.':;'^
Planning Research Corp.
National Delivery Order
SAIC
National Deflwry Order
E&E
National Delivery Older
TYPE
Cost reimbursable
(ttiruSBA)
Cost reimbursable
Cost reimbursable
Cost reimbursable
Cost reimbursable
Cost Reimbursable
PURPOSE
Study of abantionned
weds at Anetri Reid
Enforcement and expert
witnessing for South San
Francisco Bay
Ecotogfcal assessments
Superf unc2 enforcenient
support
Superfund ettiorcement
support
Emergency response support
VALUE
574,609
$300,000
$353,899
$40.000.000
$40,000,000
$85.000,000
P9SWPLOVEFS
ASSIGNED (if)
1CO
1PO
1CO
1 WAM
100
1 WAM
IPO
26WAMS
1 PO
19WAMS
IPO
BWAMs
m
-------
-------
-------
-------
1222.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
MR ?4 1992
MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF
IW TC RN ATION AC ACTIVITIES
TO: OIA Staff
FROM: Timothy Atkeson / X>
SUBJECT: Contractor Management in OIA
In late February, the EPA Inspector General issued an audit
report criticizing the Agency's management of some of its largest
contracts. The IG was especially critical of an Agency "culture"
which failed to distinguish between contractor personnel and EPA
employees, allowed contractors to perform inherently governmental
functions, and promoted an atmosphere where using contractors for
personal services occurred with disturbing frequency. Because of
this criticism which has been leveled at the Agency, I wish to
remind OIA personnel of who our on-site contractors are and of
the guidelines which govern our relationships with them.
1. On-Site Contractor Personnel / Personal Services Issue:
Our contractors perform work set forth in delivery orders or
work assignments. Requesting contractors to perform work not
described in the applicable work request usually constitutes a
personal service, a breach of proper contract management. Asking
a contractor to send a fax, type a memo, or deliver mail are
common examples of personal service requests: each implies an
employer/employee relationship between a Government worker and a
contractor. Contracting Officers usually disallow costs which a
contractor incurs in performing such work. Furthermore,
Government employees who direct personal services may lose their
Project Officer or Work Assignment Manager warrant, receive an
official reprimand, or (in extreme cases) be held financially
liable for costs incurred.
Personal services relationships rarely arise from criminal
intent, or even from a desire to stretch the limits of a scope of
work. Most personal services begin because a Government employee
does not know what work a contractor may or may not perform. Too
often, Government personnel are unaware that some of their "co-
workers" are actually contractor employees. OIA currently has
four contractors working on-site:
on «t-cyn(ecJ Paper
-------
Debbie Taylor-DuConge (Unisys) — Debbie serves as OIA's LAN
Administrator. Her duties include running system backups,
installing new LAN software, providing assistance to users having
difficulties with the LAN, adding new users to the LAN, providing
LAN training, and providing for overall maintenance of the LAN.
Barbara McBeth (Unisys) — Barbara serves as OIA's Backup
LAN Administrator. Her duties are essentially the same as Debbie
DuConge's. Barbara also provides basic user training in the
software packages available on the LAN and registers OIA
personnel for the WIC's computer classes.
Chris Holben (Labat-Anderson) — Chris provides general
support to the TIPS project. His duties include coordinating
distribution of TIPS with USIA, coordinating the review of TIPS
by other EPA offices, and creating a directory of locations for
TIPS. The delivery order under which Chris works runs through
September, 1992.
LaWanda Britt (CSC) — LaWanda serves as the Data Input
Operator for OIA's Travel Cable System, INFORM System, and other
in-house databases. LaWanda's work is strictly limited to data
input and does not extend to programming, general word
processing, or PC user support. The delivery order under which
LaWanda works runs through September, 1992.
POD has asked each of our on-site contractors to place signs
at their cubicles which clearly identify them as non-EPA
employees and has reminded them to wear their security badges at
all times. The revised OIA phone list will also distinguish
between government and contractor employees.
In order to assure that personal services relationships do
not evolve within our office, please do not ask our contractors
to:
* write/sign/issue official correspondence;
* make photocopies, send faxes, act as couriers, type
documents, or perform any other clerical/secretarial
duties not specifically set forth in a scope of work;
* attend meetings not directly related to their job
as set forth in the statement of work (if a contractor
does attend a meeting, he/she must identify himself/
herself as a contractor);
* assist in the preparation of purchase requests, work
assignments, independent government estimates, or other
documents which contain sensitive information and could
result in an unfair competitive advantage on future
procurements;
-------
* attend office functions such as going away parties, brown
bag lunches, Christmas parties, etc.
2. Management Accountability;
OIA has already taken steps to improve the quality of
contracts management. Within the past three months our office
has sponsored two on-site presentations of the PCMD course in
contracts administration. As a result of these courses, 17 OIA
personnel received the training required of an EPA Delivery Order
Project Officer. The number of OIA staff members registering for
the course has increased substantially from last year's total of
three. Because a relatively large number of OIA staffers have
now received DOPO training, it will be easier for our
organization to avoid personal service relationships.
In accordance with Christian Holmes's recent memo on
contract management in EPA, OIA has appointed two Senior
Procurement Officers who will assure the effectiveness and
integrity of all procurement activities within the office. Alan
Hecht will serve as the SES-level SPO and Joan Fidler will serve
as the alternate SPO. Also in accordance with the Holmes memo,
every member of the Senior Executive Service will complete a
special seminar on their roles and responsibilities in contract
management by the end of FY 1992.
3. Process Implications:
Given the Agency's emphasis on proper contract management,
POD must review all future delivery orders, work assignments, and
grants in greater depth. Because of increased scrutiny, the
level of detail required in new work requests will likely
increase. The lead-time for processing will grow accordingly.
Work assignments, delivery orders, and grants should be submitted
to POD at least four weeks prior to the required date of
issuance, particularly as many of these documents require OGC
review. Longer lead times allow POD to correct problems before
the procurement request package leaves OIA. As always, POD will
make every effort to process work quickly.
If you have any questions regarding what work our
contractors nay perform or questions concerning the processing of
work requests, please contact either Dennis Cunningham or Stephen
Kovash. Dennis may be reached at 260-4195. Stephen may be
reached at 260-4799.
-------
-------
y*"*^
\,V; Wv:-Ul.' V f
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON.D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
PREVENTION, PESTICIDES,
AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
April 17, 1992
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
FROM:
TO:
Contract Management Follow-up
0 x-//^^*—*-
Linda J. Fisher
Assistant Administra torpor Prevention, Pis'ticides,
and Toxic Substances^ - v
Christian R. Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator for Administration
and Resource Management
As discussed in my memo to the Administrator dated March 27,
1992 (copy attached) , OPPTS is pursuing a number of activities to
improve our management of contracts. These issues are receiving the
full attention of our senior leadership. In addition to the March
27th memorandum, the following information is provided in response to
your request of March 31, 1992:
I. Vulnerabilities that were identified in any program,
management or other audit (e.g., by OIG or GAO) during the last five
years.
OPPTS responses to OIG and GAO audits as they are completed
and " initiates appropriate action, as necessary, to correct any
problems brought out by the OIG/GAO review. Over the last five years,
no vulnerabilities were noted other than those currently reported and
tracked in the FMFIA process. They are weaknesses of a
programmatic/management nature and none are directly related to
contract management issues.
II. Vulnerabilities that were identified in any internal
control review pursuant to FMFIA requirements during the last five
years.
Over the past five years, internal reviews have revealed
certain vulnerabilities of a programmatic or management nature. None
of them were associated with contracting issues. All of the planned
corrective actions have been completed except for two (Agency-level
weaknesses) currently identified and tracked in the FMFIA process.
They are:
Data Systems - Generic Chemical Review and Registration. The
ability of the systems to effectively assist in the managing and
tracking of pesticide regulatory decision making activities.
-------
-2-
Export Policy - A review of the PIC notification process for
its effectiveness in achieving Agency objectives.
III. Corrective actions initiated or completed to address
such vulnerabilities.
Corrective action plans for OPPTS' Material Weaknesses and
Agency-level Weaknesses are inplace to address reported
vulnerabilities. Audit follow-up corrective actions in response to
DIG and GAO audits are also underway. Vulnerabilities identified by
internal reviews are complete except as reported above in item II.
IV. Implementation schedules for any corrective actions not
yet completed.
Corrective actions and a schedule of the planned completion
dates are reported in our individual responses to OIG/GAO audits.
Our progress towards the scheduled achievement of these corrective
actions is the subject of status updates in the Agency's Management
Action Tracking System (MATS). Likewise, planned schedules for
completing corrective actions of FMFIA reported weaknesses are
reported in the Agency's Corrective Action Tracking System (CATS).
V. The attached charts show the number of contracts managed
by each office in OPPTS, the type, dollar value, and purpose, as well
as the staff members involved in the management of these contracts.
As stated before, OPPTS is committed to increasing senior
management's involvement in the area of contracts management. To this
end we are negotiating with Procurement and Contracts Management
Division (PCMD), for technical assistance in developing a diagnostic
approach to evaluating current practices, and developing training
modules for OPPTS personnel for continuous contracts management
improvement.
One final note, I believe that it is crucial to keep in mind
that OPPTS is highly leveraged and underfunded in S&E. The AC&C
component of the OPPTS programs is increasing while the number of FTEs
remains relatively static. This difficult situation is exacerbated
by our shortfall in S&E because we cannot pay for the number of FTEs
allocated to us. Hopefully this problem, which is Agency-wide in
nature, can be addressed in the FY 1994 budget process.
Attachments
cc: OPPTS Office Directors
Dick White
Joyce Hay
-------
ract Summary
Contractor
Kline 4 Co. (Sole Source)
Kevric Coapany
Procure. Request Proposal
Research Triangle Inst.
loane Marketing Research
•vnamac
ON Engineering
Ualcoff * Associates, Inc.
Labat -Anderson, Inc.
Leidlau fnvironmnt Service
Acurex, Inc.
Versar, Inc. (OTS)
URC (OHim>
Clement
' URC (OHRM)
URC (OMRH)
DPHA, Inc.
Equity Associates
-------
-------
MAR
992
EPA TRAINING CN FUNDING
(ON-SITE) * ol TASK/ AMOUNT FUNDED
DELIVERABLE # CONTRACTOR DELIVERY FY92 COMM.- FY92 TOTAL TOTAL $$ BRIEF
OONTRACTQB
DIVISION: EED
ALLIANCE
Baltella Mem.
Clement (OPP)
Cox 8 Assoc.
Cox 8 Assoc.
Gen. Sciences
Corp.
ICF (OGWP)
Midwest
Research Insl.
Research Triangle
Institute (ORD)
Versar Inc.
Woslal, Inc.
DIVISION: ETD
ABT. Assoc.
ADT. Assoc.
Hampshire
ICF
Malhtoch
SAIC
TRI
CONTRACT *
68-DO-8180
68-DO-0126
68-D1-0075
68-DO-0061
68-DO-0099
6B-DO-0080
68-CO-0083
68-DO-0137
68-01-0099
6B-D9-0166
68-D9-0174
68-DO-0020
68-D9-0169
E8-DO-0165
68-08-0116
C8-D8-0112
68-D1-0156
68-D9-017G
ppai OFFICER
E. Sterrell
E. Slerretl
WAM:J. Scott
E. Slerrelt
E. Sterrell
L. Delplre
W.M. Romblad
J. Breen
SIA1U3
Certified
Certllled
Certified
Certllled
Certllled
Certllled
Certllled
Certified
WAM: R.Rolllrc Certllled
T. Murray
E. Sterrott
E. Fesco
C. Rawlo
P. Bennett
C. Pawle
C. Rnwlo
C. Rawle
R. Rakshpal
Certllled
Certified
Certified
Certified
Certified
Certified
Certified
Certified
Certified
51LU
No
No
No
No
ND
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
.lire..
CPFF
CPFF
CPFF
CPFF
CPFF
CPFF
CPAf
CPAF
CPFF
CPAF
CPFF
CPAF
CPFF
CPFF
CPFF
CPFF
CPFF
CPFF
'
LOG
Lee o
LCe 1 n/a
LOS o
LOE 0
Time & mater. 0
LC€
LOE 0
LC6
Time 4 mater. 0
LCG 0
Spec, dellvrbl 0
Spoc. dollvrbl 0
Spec, dollvrbl 0
Spec, dellvrbl 0
Spoc. dollvrbl 0
Spec, dollvrbl 0
Spec, dellvrbl 0
1
26
11
21
12
1
33
1
35
20
118
104
7
151
71
9
8
612.000
20.000
83,000
135,000
162.000
175.000
1,400,000
20.000
200,000
300,000
504.000
175000
2.200.000
20.000
500.000
600.000
834.000
150,000 150.000 150.000
1.132,500
250.000
••" ?.'!•'•
"•It-
540.000
105.000
3.200,000
250.000
. " 2.500.000
aoo.-oob
6.565,000
250.000
.*»'
6.200.000
1.800.000
621.275
345.000
0
324.517
125.000
240.000
0
2.000.000
1.220.000
0
1.100.000
830.000
7B7.000
463.000
5.381.942
3.508.690
800.427
5,156.990
1.869.909
3.600.231
1.362,997
Lead Prev.Handbook
Survey Design
Support
PCB Seminar
Slat Anal. Support
Slat. Anal. Support
Model Sup. Exposure
Rule SupVPCB
Sampling/Ana.
of selected subs.
RESEARCH/LEAD
;: *.iti
. EXP. ASSESS.
*»*"'
&TAT,ANAL
Gen. Tech. Support
Economic Analysis
TRI Data Analysis
Gen. Tech. Support
Economic Analysis
Engineering Suppor
Chemistry Support
-------
Ol >
CONTRACTOR
TRI
DIVISION: IMD
CSC - CBI Center
(OIRM)
CONTRACT «
68-D1-0161
PRC/ATI -CBI Imaglns
CAS - TSCA Invenlor}68-W0-O028
CRMI
(OARM) .:-
PRO
CSC/NMI
(OIRM)
CSC (Non-CBI)
(OIRM)
Computer Based
Systems, Inc.
Labat-Anderson, Inc.
(OIRM)
MOL
(OARM)
PRC/Sycom
Boor-Allen
(OIRM)
SYOOM
Viar i Co.
6B-D1-0026
68-01-7361
68-WO-0043
68-WO-0043
68-08-0013
68-W9-0052
60-WO-0007
68-01-7381
6B-W9-7361
68-W1-0050
68-W8-0083
EPA. TRAINING
PROJ. OFFICER STATUS
>
\ V
R. Rakshpal Certified
J. Geer Certified
J. Martin Certified
H. Lau Certified
Y. Klnney Certified
Y. Klnney Certified
Y. Klnney Certified
D. Sellers Certified
D. Sellers Certified
:G Brown .... Certified
(WAM)
Y. Klnnoyh Corllllod
Newburg-RlnnCerlllled
Newburg-RlnnCerllfled
Newburg-RInn Certified
C. Drew Certified
ON
SUE
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Na
FUNDING
TYPE'
CPFF
IDIQ
IDIQ
LOE-CR
IDIQ
IDIQ
IDIQ
IDIQ
IDIQ
IDIQ
IDIQ
IDIQ
IOIQ
DELIVERABLE # CONTRACTOR
JYPE" PERSONNEL
Spec, dollvrbl 0
Service 43
Service 1
Service 1
Service
Service 1
Service 1
Service 6
Service 0
Service 0
Service
Service 0
Service 0
Service 0
Service 0
DELIVERY FV92COMM.- FT92 TOTAL TOTAL $$
ORDERS OBLIGATED
2 260.000
PLANNED | IN CONTRACT
200,000
1,330.172
1 1.377.100
1 65.000
1 598,000
21,000
1 17.800
1 182.000
1 1 1 a.e'Qo
•
1 2.760.000
1 97.100
50.000
4 300.000
2 25.000
1 300.000
1 32,000
1,377,100
65,000
625,000
21.000
17.800
182.000
215.000
4.100.000
337.500
50.000
495.000
75.000
310.000
33.000
1377100
65000
625000
21000
17800
182000
215000
*
'
4100000'
337500
50000
495000
75000
310000
33000
BRIEF
DESCRIPTION
Chemistry Support
Doc. Proc. Center
CBI Imaginary
TSCA Inventory
'
'* '. **
tS'f . -
A
'•Z*'^* '
Journal Subsc.
-------
UNISYS
DIVISION: HAD
CSC (OIRM)
Rll
DIVISION: PPD
ICF. Inc. (OPPE)
SAIC (Clnnclnnall)
Cadmus. (OW)
Ballella ( )
Booz-Allen (OPM)
EPA TRAINING ON FUNDING-
CONTRACT H PRCU, OFFICER STATUS SHE TYPE'
68-01-7347 Nowburg-RlnnCertWed Yes IDIO
6B-WO-0043 S. Davis Cerlllled Na
(WAM)
69-01-0011 W. Woodbum Cerlllled Yes
68-W9-OOBO J. Krleger Cerlllled
(WAM)
68-CB-0062 P. Flailery Cerlllled
(WAM)
P. Flailery Cerlllled
68-CO-0063 E.Yang (WAM) Cerlllled
80-01-706 J.Edward Cerlllled
(ON-SITE) » ol TASK/ AMOUNT FUNDED
DELIVERABLE ((CONTRACTOR DELIVERY FT92COMM.- FY92 TOTAL TOTAL $$
J. Edward
(WAM)
TYPE"
Service
LOE
LOE
OPPT TOTALS =
* ol OPPT Contracts
# of OPPT Contractor!
PERSONNEL QBDEBS OBLIGATED EL&NNEQ I IN CONTRACT
396.900 451.000
0 1 • 691,175 2230000
12 n/a 809,900 1200000
75,000
40.000
30,000
25.000
75.000
86 746 14395167 31105500 72195665
,VI' •
.. '•.-. • • ; .••-'.
2J >:' . . .: - • -
BRIEF
DESCRIPTION
451000
2.230.000 ASHAA Loans/gram
4.800.000 TSCA Hotline
P.P. Stale Demo.
Analytical and
Logistical Suppor
LCA Impact Assess.
TCM
-------
CONTRACTOR
CONTRACT #
UAM/DOPO
TRAINING
ON/OFF FUND/DELIV ON-SITE
SITE TYPE CONTRACTOR
TASK ORDERS
DEL ORDERS
AMOUNT FUNDED PURPOSE
FY 91/92 TO DATE TL ADD'NL PLANNED
PERSONNEL
URC
AST ASSOC
ABT ASSOC
CSC
SAIC
AHS
SRA
SRA
ABT ASSOC
SAIC
VIAR
CSC
SAIC
VIAR
VIAR
CSC
CSC
CSC
VIAR
HRA
INTEG LAB
ABT ASSOC
CSC
CSC
SAIC
VI CYAN
VIAR
WIC/OSA
68-W8-0104
68-00-0020
68-D9-0169
68-WO-0043
68- C8- 0062
68-W9-0039
68-D8-0017
68-08-0017
68-00-0020
68-UO-0025
68-W8-0083
68-WO-0043
68-C8-0066
68- UO- 0083
68- WO- 0083
68-WO-0043
68-WO-0043
68-WO-0043
68-W8-0083
K.
K.
K.
P.
P.
P.
V.
P.
P.
P.
P.
D.
P.
D.
D.
J.
D.
C.
M.
68-DOO-0165B.
68-01-0159
68-08-0112
68-WO-0043
68-WO-0043
68-C8-0062
68-01-0007
68-W8-0083
68-01-7437
C.
B.
D.
D.
F.
F.
R.
F.
CHERRY
CHERRY
CHERRY
SAUNDERS
SAUNDERS
SAUNDERS
LATHROP
SAUNDERS
SAUNDERS
SAUNDERS
SAUNDERS
MEREDITH
SAUNDERS
MEREDITH
MEREDITH
MASON
MEREDITH
SECREST
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
PODNIES I NSKI CERTIFIED
SULLIVAN
FLETCHER
SULLIVAN
DYSON
DYSON
SMITH
SMITH
ZISA
SMITH
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
CERTIFIED
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
LOE
LOE
LOE
FP/IQ
AWARD FEE
ID/10
LOE
LOE
AWARD FEE
AWARD FEE
LOE
FP/IQ
C+AWARD
LOE
LOE
FP/IQ
FP/IQ
FP/IO
FP/ID
LOE
LOE
LOE
IQ
10
LOE
LOE
LOE
LOE
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
2
DO
WA
WA
DO
WA
DO
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
DO
WA
DO
DO
DO
DO
DO
DO
#45
#3-02
#3-06
#481
#3-81
#70
#31C-1
#31C-2
#2-65
#53
#208
#316
#C-3-84
#232
#227
#310
#070
#179
#0206
WA* 2-03
D0100841
WA
DO
DO
WA
WA
DO
DO
#P3-1
#368
#369
#3-40
#1-11
#219
#300-92
$9,029.00
$50,000.00
$15,000.00
$299,000.00
$136,000.00
$50,000.00
$240,000.00
$195,000.00
$100,000.00
$579,700.00
$37,000.00
$280,000.00
$200,000.00
$426,000.00
$100,000.00
$60,000.00
$339,000.00
$55,028.27
$35,000.00
$40,000.00
$100,000.00
$115,000.00
$65,000.00
$58,869.20
$40,000.00
$80,000.00
$275,000.00
$96,250.00
STRATEGIC PLANNING
MEETING PLANNING
TRACKING SYSTEM
FIFRA,TSCA,EPCRA TRACK
FIFRA SEC7 PROCESSES
SEC7 SYS EVAL
PESTICIDES DATABASE
WRK SHOP 6G INFO
TRI DATABASE
TECH OUTREACH SUPP
TEXT IMAGE PILOT
$124,000.00 DATA ENTRY SSTS/FTTS
$112,000.00 TECH INSPEC DOCUMENTS
FTTS TO LAN SYS
$200,000.00 SYSTEM ENHANCEMENTS ETS
$12,000.00 TSCA/CBI TRACKING
DATA ENTRY SSTS/FTTS
POLICY ACCESS SYSTEM
ST. LAW & SURVEY DATABAS
EPCRA SEC 313
$101,016.00 DATA AUDIT REVIEW/FIFRA
TECH&FINANCE ANAL OF P2
$41,105.15 ADP/DATA ENTRY
$40,469.92 ADP/DATA ENTRY
$20,000.00 FILE MANAGEMENT
$62,000.00 CMS SYSTEM
$185,000.00 COMPUTER SYS ENHANCEMENT
ON-SITE PC/LAN SUPP
TOTAL
$4,075,876.47
$712,591.07
-------
\
\
-------
-------
OPR-13-1992 13:07 FROM NET I x CONTRACTOR LISTING TO 2609053 P. 02
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
APR -3 1992
OFFICE Of ENTOfCEMEKT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Contract Management in EPA
FROM: Herbert H. Tate, Jr.
Assistant Administrator
TO Christian R. Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator
Office of Administration and Resources Management
Pursuant to your memorandum of February 28, 1992, I am hereby
designating Gerald A. Bryan as the Office of Enforcement's Senior
Procurement Officer at headquarters and Frank Covington as the Senior
Procurement Officer at the National Enforcement Investigations Center in
Denver, Colorado. These individuals will have full responsibility for the
effectiveness and integrity of all procurement activities in this office.
In addition, I have directed these individuals to re-emphasize the
necessity of maintaining a proper relationship with contractors to all OE
staff who participate in procurement and contract management activities.
They have been directed to assure that contract employees have, and
wear, identification that is visibly distinct from EPA employees and to
review current space utilization practices to assure that contractor
workspace is physically segregated from EPA employee workspace
whenever possible. Lastly, they will conduct an immediate review to
determine that contractors (1) ore not trained at EPA expense beyond
what is required by their contract, (2) are not participants in EPA events
such as awards ceremonies, (3) are not attending EPA staff meetings
except in specific defined roles (such as delivering a briefing) and (4) are
not assigned to positions or activities in which they may be mistaken for
EPA staff.
-------
OPR-13-1992 13:08 FROM NET I / CONTRACTOR LISTING TO 2609053 P.03
I am attaching for your information a memorandum to all OE
managers, supervisors and contract management staff alerting them to our
concerns. Each has also received a copy of your February 28, 1992
memorandum which highlights areas for particular attention.
Attachment
cc Gerald A. Bryan, Director
Office of Compliance Analysis
and Program Operations
Frank Covington, Director
National Enforcement Investigations Center
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
APR -3 !332
OFFICE Of ENFORCEMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Contract Management
FROM:
TO.
Herbert H. Tate, Jr.
Assistant Administrator
All OE Managers and Supervisors
All Office of Enforcement Procurement
and Contract Management Staff
I have designated Gerald A. Bryan as the Office of Enforcement's
Senior Procurement Officer (SPO) for headquarters and Frank Covington as
the SPO for the National Enforcement Investigations Center in Denver,
Colorado. These individuals will have full responsibility for preserving
the effectiveness and integrity of all our procurement and contract
management activities.
Initially, one of their principal functions will be to assure that each of
us recognizes that, as public servants, we have a unique responsibility to
adhere to all regulations governing procurement and contract management
activities. Failure to conduct our activities consistent with the spirit and
substance of these regulations undermines public trust in our undertakings
and weakens our ability to achieve the agency's mission. Our relationships
with contractor personnel must be straightforward and aboveboard
without even an appearance of abuse of any kind.
I am attaching a memorandum from Christian R. Holmes, Acting
Assistant Administrator for Administration and Resources Management
which spells out in more detail some initiatives which we have been asked
Pnnt«de>f< Pt>fyr.l*ri Paper
-------
to take to assure that our activities comport with Federal procurement
regulations as well as Agency policies. J have asked our SPOs to conduct a
review of our current procurement and contract management
activities/practices to enable us to identify potential weaknesses and
develop appropriate corrective measures. Your active participation in this
review is essential if we are to be successful in our efforts.
Attachment
cc Gerald A. Bryan, Director
Office of Compliance Analysis
and Program Operations
Frank Covington, Director
National Enforcement Investigations Center
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 i
APR 3 1992
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT; Contract Survey
FROM: Gerald Bryan, Directoj
Office of Compliance
Program Operations
Frank Covington, Director
National Enforcement Investigations Center
TO: All Office of Enforcement Office Directors
As a result of the Inspector General's draft audit report on the
Agency's contract with the Computer Sciences Corporation, EPA has begun
to evaluate all contract and procurement activities in order to develop an
effective corrective action plan to address the weaknesses which were
identified. The thrust of the report alleges that EPA's "culture" is
characterized by a lack of attention to Federal procurement regulations
and an inappropriate reliance upon, and relationship with, contractors. I'o
coordinate activities in this regard, the Assistant Administrator has
designated us as the Office of Enforcement's (OE) Senior Procurement
Officers for headquarters and the National Enforcement Investigations
Center respectively. Our responsibilities include assuring the effectiveness
and integrity of all of our procurement practices.
The Assistant Administrator for Administration and Resources
Management has pointed out that, as public servants, we must recognize
that we have a special responsibility to obey both the spirit and the letter
of the law. No matter the urgency and importance of our work to protect
the environment, cutting corners in contract management is not acceptable.
Puwtetf on Recycled Paper
-------
-lj-1992 13=10 FROM NETI / CONTRACTOR LISTING TO '2609053
It will only undermine public trust in EPA and weaken our ability to
protect the environment. The Agency has an obligation to act quickly and
decisively to correct the real and potential abuses reported by the
Inspector General.
In order to meet this responsibility our first task is to summarize
OE's current an,fj projected contract/procurement activities and to assess
the effectiveness of the management and oversight mechanisms which are
currently being utilized. The attached survey form was developed to
facilitate and expedite gathering the information needed to respond to
inquiries from both the Office of the Administrator and the Office of
Administration and Resources Management concerning our procurement
activities. Please make every effort to return the completed forms to the
attention of Pat Alberico (112 NE Mall) by the close of business on April
10, 1992. If you have questions or otherwise need assistance please
contact Pat on FTS 260-2564.
Attachment
-------
OE Contract Survey - Part I
1. Name of Respondent: __-M______--_-..^_____-<1-1______
Telephone Number; _^_____ ^_——_—«_____ Date:
Area Code Number M/O/Y
Office:
2. Total Contract Dollars Budgeted for FY1992:
intramural
Extramural
3. Total Dollars Committed to Date;
Intramural
Extramural
4. Total Dollars Obligated to Date:
Intramural
Extramural
5. Contract Mechanism Used;
(Pltast Include name of office which aponaortd this procurement ana contract number along with type of contract - fixed fee, level
or errort etc.}. Also include name and telephone number of contract of riwr.
Office:
Contract Number: _________—___ Type of Contract
Contract Officer --
Telephone: .
Area Code Number
6. Term of Contract:
Start Date or Projected Start Date;
M/D/Y
End Date or Projected End Date:
M/D/Y
7. purpose of procurement:
(Brief description of service* or goods procured)
Page 1
-------
ftPR-13-1992 13=11 FROM NETI / CONTRACTOR LISTING TO
2609053 P.09
OE contract survey
8. Name of Contractor:
0. Art contractor personnel working on site at an EPA facility or facilities?
If yes gfve number and locations.
9a. Number: ___^_ Location: ————————.————.
Yes D NO
.Bulldlng/FadHty
.Street
. City/State
9b. Number:
Location:
Add additional sheets If necessary.
.Bullcfing/FacilUy
street
City/State
10. Name of main OE staff contact directing this effort:
Name: __———__——____-
Telephone:
Area Code
Number
Has this person filed a confidential statement of
financial interests (EPA Form 3120-m
Has this person had project officer training?
Has this person had contract officer training?
What other contract management training
has this person had?
Yes Q No Q
Yes n NO D
Yes D NO D
Add additional sheets if necessary.
Page 2
-------
ftPR-13-1992 13=12 FROM NETI / CONTRACTOR LISTING TO 2609053 P.10
OE Contract Survey - Part 11
11. Vulnerabilities tbat were identified in any program, management or otner audit (e.g.
by OIG or GAO) during me last rive years;
12. Vulnerabilities that were identified In any internal control review pursuant to
FMFIA requirements during the last five years
13. Corrective actions initiated or completed to address such vulnerabilities;
14. implementation schedules for any corrective actions not yet completed;
Attach additional sheets as necessary. Page 3
-------
-------
tag
I UNITED STATfcji ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
/ WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
. MAR 2 4 1992
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
MEMORANDUM
Contract Management Review
William K. Reilly
Administrator
This is in response to your March 10, 1992, memorandum in
which you request an assessment of contract management problems .
in the Office of Inspector General.
In the Spring of 1991, as the CSC findings were becoming
apparent, the Office of Audit looked closely at contract
management in our fiscal 1991 Internal Control and Alternate
Internal Control Reviews (ICRs and AICRs). Among other things,
these reviews were to determine whether the OIG in effect had
converted any contracts into illegal personal services contracts
because of continuous supervision and control by OIG employees.
Based on the results of these reviews, we concluded that this was
not the case for any of our contracts. In the course of these
reviews several other matters came to our attention that we
corrected to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. These
included moving a contractor off-site, and requiring Project
Officer training for employees who perform (or with the perceived
authority to perform) contract management duties.
We believe that our internal control evaluations have
provided reasonable assurance that adequate controls are
exercised over contract management within the Office of Inspector
General. In addition, an OIG Manual chapter issued last year
specifically addresses contract management procedures in the OIG.
In a further effort to ensure that we are complying with all
regulations and have good contract management practices within
the OIG, we are scheduling a meeting of all our project officers
in the next quarter. We will discuss any additional concerns we
-------
have, such as whether we .consistently develop independent cost
estimates for each audit assignment we give to CPA contractors,
and we will take corrective actions to address any deficient
areas.
I share your concerns regarding the importance of good
contract management at EPA. Should you or your staff have any
questions, please call me on 260-3137.
. Martin
-------
-------
-------
\
-------
-------
-------
have, such as whether we consistently develop independent cost
estimates for each audit assignment we give to CPA contractors,
and we will take corrective actions to address any deficient
areas.
I share your concerns regarding the importance of good
contract management at EPA. Should you or your staff have any
questions, please call me on 260-3137. r\
Martin
-------
-------
-------
NOTE:
On 4/10/92, the Senior Project Officer for OCEPA, Christian Rice,
orally informed SCCM that, upon receiving the Administrator's
3/10/92 memorandum, the Associate Administrator for OCEPA decided
that his 3/9/92 memorandum was a sufficient response. Therefore,
OCEPA did not prepare a separate memorandum directly responding
to the Administrator on his 3/10/92 memo.
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON DC 20460
MAR 3
»«^m*j"Lr>AKTT-iTT«* OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS
MEMORANDUM AND PUBUC AFFAIRS
SUBJECT Contract Management In OCEPA
FROM: Lewis S.W. Crampton ]L
Associate Administratdr
TO: Gordon Binder
Chief of Staff
In response to the Christian Holmes memo of 28 Feb. regarding Contract
Management at EPA (attached), there are several actions that the Office of
Communications. Education, and Public Affairs (OCEPA) must take to Implement a
strong contract-management program. Carl. Chris, and I have met with Diane
Bazzle and Debbie Lake (OCEPA's Administrative Officer) and discussed this matter.
This memo outlines the major steps.
1. Management Accountability: OCEPA's senior managers must lead.
counsel, and set expectations to carry out contract management.
Action One: Designate a single manager, reporting directly to
the AA, to serve as "Senior Procurement Officer'
with full responsibility for the effectiveness and
integrity of all procurement activities within
OCEPA.
Implement: Christian Rice of my senior staff is an EPA-certifled
project officer ('83) and contract administrator
('92). He holds an MBA and is an appropriate
choice for this assignment.
Action Two: Every SES member of OCEPA must complete
special seminar on their roles and responsibilities
in contract management. Course will be developed
soon.
Implement: Five personnel (Crampton. Smith. Knight. Torrusio
and Gagllardl) will be submitted for the SES
seminar when announced.
2. Clear Distinction between Contractors and EPA: OCEPA will maintain
clear distinction between EPA staff and contractors to avoid potential
abuses in contract management.
Action Three: All OCEPA contract employees will have and wear
Identification that is visibly distinct from that of
EPA employees.
-------
-------
04/10/82 15:45 PVBLIC AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON DC 20460
April 2, 1992
OFFICE Of COMMUNICATIONS
AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Follow-up Response to OCEPA's Review of Contracts Management
FROM: Lewis S.W. Crampt
Associate Admini
TO: Christian R. Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator
Office of AdTnfpJstratfnn and Resource Management
This is In response to your Mar. 31 memorandum to AAs and RAs in which you
clarify the scope of the Administrator's request for Information about present or
potential contract management problems in EPA.
Thank you for the kind mention in your memo of the actions we have outlined
within OCEPA to ensure that any vulnerabilities in contract management are
corrected Immediately.
Following is additional information about contract management within OCEPA:
* Vulnerabilities identified in any audit during the last five years:
Response: There have been no GAO, IG. or other external audits conducted
within OCEPA or its predecessors in the last five years
any contract vulnerabilities.
Vulnerabilities identified in any internal control pursuant to FMFIA
requirements during last five years:
Response: OCEPA's FMFIA controls have identified several beginnfng-of-
coutract-cycle vulnerabilities that have, in feet, manifested
themselves in seven violations of purchasing regulations with
respect to unauthorized procurements over the last several
years. Each of these violations have been subsequently ratified
and an have been less than $10.000, with most being for less
than $500. These actions did. however, reflect a need to
tighten purchasing policies within the office to avoid
unauthorized procurements. Most were a result of lack of
knowledge, loose internal procedures and an effort to start
work prior to PCMD approval. These internal procedures have
all been tightened and all personnel involved in the purchasing
chain are being trained.
-------
Corrective actions Initiated or completed to address such vulnerabiUUes-
Implementation schedules for any corrective actions not yet completed-
agin this
performance requirement In fflM?5r «SgJ S? ££»f
performance appraisals. *eview ana end-of-year
Number of contracts managed by OCEPA:
Name of contT7,rfT>r
Education Versar
-------
04/10/92 15:46 PUBLIC AFFAIRS il006
In addition to the above contracts. OCEPA has several (approx. 12) Blanket
Purchase Agreements (BPAs) with sources in order to provide general service
support. Most of the BPAs do not exceed $10.000 per year in calls, but one BPA,
for design/layout and editorial services, is NTE $100.000 over a 3-year period. We
are currenilj- working with PCMD to competitively bid this as an IQID contract
OCEPA point of contact: Chris Rice. 260-5986.
• Number of procurement personnel and legal staff assigned to contracts
management;
Response: Procurement personnel: None
Program staff: 1 Project Officer
3 WAMs (one for each WA)
6 personnel authorized to make
rails on approx. 12 BPAs (no
more than 3 on any one BPA)
T-egal staffi None
Thank you for the opportunity to expand on the items in our earlier response.
Please let me know if any addition Information Is necessary.
cc: Gordon Binder
Diane Bazzle
Carl GagUardi
Chris Rice
OCEPA Division Directors
C
-------
AFFAIRS
® 003
la addition, those personnel responsible for caHs on blanket purchase
agreements or contract administration within OCEPA will also receive the training
~ this year or ensure that they meet the 3-year recertification requirement. With rare
. exception, these people have done an 'outstanding Job at these acquisition functions
and OCEPA needs their continued support and performance.
I have appointed Chris Rice as OCEPA's senior procurement officer responsible
for seeing to it that we meet both the letter and spirit of the acquisition regulations
and appropriations requirements. Chris will lead a QAT effort within our office
during the month of April to correct any deficiencies and establish a set of simple
purchasing and contracting groundrules for OCEPA,
In the tnfertm, all documents requiring commitment of OCEPA funds will be
channelled through Chris on their way to signature by Carl or myself in order to
make a spot-check for adherence to policy. In Chris's absence, Sheri Johnson will
perform this function. Division directors can assist fhfs effort by ensuring that a
well-stated Justification and description of how the intended purchase fits into the
bigger picture is Included.
I realize that acquisition procedures sometimes appear to be in conflict with
our requirements to accomplish an education or outreach activity In a timely
manner. Information is our business, gn^ information jg dynamic, not static. I am
aware of the burdens placed on you in this regard, arid I win do everything I can to
support your efforts to serve our clients in a timely and effective way. As our
representative to the Procurement Task Force. Chris Rice wffl reflect our concerns
and requirements that the system work for us as wefl as we support It,
Please give this memorandum to members of your staff. I know I can count on
their and your continued support to make OCEPA an even better organization as we
build our foundation for future successes.
cc; Gordon Binder
Christian Holmes
I>ianeBasde ' . -
Chris Rice .
Sheri Johnson ......
-------
-------
-------
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
3 April 1992
OFFICE OF REGIONAL OPERATIONS
AND STATE/LOCAL RELATIONS
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Assessment of Present or Potential Contract Management
Problems in OROSLR
FROM: J^eflmt/D. Goodman
Late Administrator
TO: Christian R. Holmes
Assistant Administrator
Office of Administration and Resources Management
OROSLR manages one small and disadvantaged business set aside
contract with AScI Corporation (68-CO-0055). The value of the
contract to date is about $600,000. The purpose of the contract is
to provide support to the National Environmental Services Officer
and the Environmental Monitoring Management Council. The contract
also provides support to the Office of Environmental Education's
grant program.
We have no vulnerabilities identified by the DIG, GAO, or
pursuant to FIMFIA requirements during the last 5 years. I
recently appointed Denise Zabinski to serve as Project Officer and
requested her to perform a review of our AScI contract. She
replaced the current Project Officer (PO), who no longer has
contracting responsibilities. Denise also serves as Work
Assignment Manager on 2 Work Assignments and is the only person in
the office no involved in contracting activities.
The review revealed the items discussed below. We anticipate
having all problems corrected as soon as possible but no later than
September 30. Denise is assigned full time to contracting duties
and is working closely with Cincinnati's Contract Management
Division (CMD) to rectify all problems. We are currently reviewing
our contracting requirements and do not anticipate that we will
exercise Option 2 of this contract.
1. Personal Services
CMD is currently investigating the occurrence of personal
services under Work Assignment (WA) 2 of the contract. The
investigation is currently underway and details cannot yet be
discussed. A stop work order was issued on the WA on March 31.
We will change the manner in which we task the contractor under the
WAs. In the future, WA managers will issue work service requests
in writing through the Project Officer. The definition of personal
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
APR I 6 1992
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Information Requested March 31, 1992, Concerning EPA's
Contracts Management
FROM: Michael Kosakowski
Deputy Senior Procurement Officer
TO: Christian R. Holmes
Acting Assistant Administrator
Office of Administration and Resources Management
The attached material supplements the information that OSWER
submitted on March 27, 1992. The additional material includes
the vulnerability assessments done by each of our offices and
lists their contracts and project officers. Since your original
and follow-up requests did not specify a format, each office
presented the information in a different format. In order to
track this information at the AA's level we looked into creating
a new system, but it quickly became evident that a considerable
amount of information would have to be entered and then
frequently updated.
In preparing for the contracts hearings of the past weeks
your Procurement and Contracts Management Division supplied us
with a printout from their Contracts Information System (CIS).
This system captures any extramural obligation by PCMD and can
retrieve for each allowance holder information on each contract
into which funds were obligated. I confirmed this yesterday
afternoon with John Oliver the Information Management Staff
Director in PCMD who is responsible for CIS. I suggest that this
become the Agency's system to track the information that you
requested. I believe that the staff to the Standing Committee
have the misunderstanding that CIS only captures initial contract
obligations. However, you may want to add additional data
elements, such as approximate number of work assignments, if you
deem that information to be crucial.
The last item that you requested was the number of legal
staff assigned to contracts management. There are none in OSWER.
The Deputy General Counsel must approve all attorney positions
outside of OGC and OE. As you may remember when you were in
OSWER, we were not very successful in getting this for our
Printed on Recycled Paoer
-------
enforcement primary responsibilities. It is,.therefore, unlikely
that we could justify this for administrative positions, assuming
we had the FTE. We have relied upon the OGC attorneys assigned
to PCMD and the Competition Advocate in PCMD to review our new
procurement packages, and we consult with them on our ongoing
contracts as the need arises. We have also on an informal basis
given draft copies of our proposed Technical Enforcement Support
contracts to our OE counterparts to review. However, these
consultations are for purposes of ensuring that the statement of
work is comprehensive, rather than legally correct.
I hope that you will find this submission to be
satisfactory. I look forward to working with the Standing
Committee and its technical staff on this effort. I served on
the OARM group that assumed control of the OPPE contract
management functions that you mentioned in your memorandum of
February 28, 1992, on Contract Management in EPA. The term
"culture" was frequently used there to describe the problems we
encountered. Although I do not believe that you will find OSWER
to possess this "culture" to anywhere near the extent that we
have noted elsewhere, OSWER is committed to continued
improvements.
cc: R. Guimond
J. Kertcher
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
4 1992
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY FIESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: OERR Contract Management Oversight/ a/^1 Initiatives
FROM: Henry L. Longest II, Director
Office of Emergency and RemedJ
TO: Don R. Clay
Assistant Administrator
I. INTRODUCTION
Contracting policy within EPA has come under increased
scrutiny of late, and programs have been tasked with developing a
list of vulnerabilities and action plans related to contract
management. This is to provide you with a summary of the Office
of Emergency and Remedial Response contract management oversight
and initiatives.
No program with the large volume of contract resources at
stake, as are managed under OERR, can afford to take contracting
responsibilities lightly. OERR historically has been proactive
in its contract management oversight, promoting continuing
improvement in this important area.
Contracts management, in fact, was one of the first areas in
which we applied large scale total quality management efforts to
streamline and improve our activities, through the Long Term
Contracting Strategy. We are undertaking a similar analysis of
our delivery of analytical services.
OERR has also modified its organizational structure to
enhance contracts management oversight, and is planning further
modifications. We have undergone extensive audits, and learned
from them. We have issued numerous guidances and bulletins on
contract management. We have instituted a mandatory training
program for work assignment managers and project officers, and
offer or support additional training programs. Within OERR, each
division has incorporated contract management in its operating
plan, and performance standards for contracts management have
been developed.
-------
This memorandum contains fourteen attachments, documents
that have been developed to support OERR contracts management.
The sheer number and variety of OERR guidances, memorandums,
workplans and forms attests to how seriously OERR has taken this
responsibility in the last few years.
The point that I want to emphasize is that identifying
vulnerabilities and developing corrective actions has been a
long-term effort within OERR, and not a new initiative. With
this in mind, this memorandum will summarize those contracts
administered by OERR; describe our contract management policies
and initiatives; and describe further efforts OERR will undertake
to implement the strategy described in the February 28, 1992
Memorandum from Christian Holmes, Acting Assistant Administrator
of the Office of Administration and Resource Management.
II. SUMMARY OF OERR CONTRACTS
There are four main areas of contract support within OERR.
Although there is some overlap in these classifications as they
apply to individual contracts, the general areas are remedial,
removal, analytical, and headquarters support.
1. Remedial (ARCS)
That aspect of the Superfund program dealing with assessment
of sites and the long-term remedial cleanup of sites on the
National Priorities List relies to a great extent on contractor
support. With the advent of the Alternative Remedial Contracting
Strategy (ARCS) in 1987, supporting contracts and contracts
management were decentralized and delegated to the regions. A
total of 45 contracts were, awarded with a total potential value
of $6.8 billion. All contracts were cost-plus-award-fee, level
of effort type, with 10-year periods of performance. The con-
tracts provide for the full spectrum of site assessment and
remedial activities, from preliminary assessments, site investi-
gations, remedial investigations and feasibility studies, to
design and construction.
These contracts are managed in the regions with headquarters
oversight provided by the Hazardous Site Control Division (HSCD)
with the Hazardous Site Evaluation Division (HSED). The complexi-
ty and magnitude of these contracts mandate considerable over-
sight. The regional management team includes both technical
project officers and administrative contracting officers.
Headquarters provides assistance in contract design and place-
ment; national contract capacity monitoring; program management
cost analysis; and general guidance on contract management,
including participation in audits and other studies.
-------
2. Removal (ERGS, TAT, REAC, HMIRT)
Emergency Response Cleanup Services (ERCS)
Emergency Response Cleanup Services (ERCS) contracts provide
emergency, time-critical, and rapid remedial cleanup support to
EPA regional offices in containing, recovering, or disposing of
hazardous substances, at NPL and non-NPL sites. They also
provide assistance in sample analysis and site restoration.
The early generations of ERCS contracts covered large multi-
region zones. Responding to recommendations in the Long-Term
Contracting Strategy that smaller contracts would enhance compe-
tition, the new contracts cover smaller zones, and in fact we are
now seeing new contractors competing for, and being awarded,
these contracts. We are also modifying these contracts to allow
performance of rapid remedial responses. The total potential
value of the fifteen contracts currently awarded or under pro-
curement, with expiration dates ranging from 1992 to 1997, is
$200 million per year. These contracts are managed by the
regions, with headquarters oversight provided by the Emergency
Response Division (ERD).
We are also encouraging site specific contracting, and,
working with PCMD, have instituted strategies to assist in
standardizing solicitations and conforming to the latest gui-
dances. Headquarters also tracks capacity, issues guidances,
conducts biannual ERCS conferences, participates in the negotia-
tion of the regional contracts and serves on their Performance
Evaluation Boards.
Technical Assistance Team (TAT)
The Technical Assistance Team (TAT) contracts provide a
broad range of technical support services to EPA regional offices
for the removal program as it operates under CERCLA, the Oil
Pollution Act, and RCRA. TAT offices have been established in
each of the ten EPA regions, with additional offices to support
the Environmental Response Team (ERT) in Edison, NJ, and EPA
headquarters. TAT activities include technical and administra-
tive support to On-Scene Coordinators during responses, sampling,
field and laboratory analysis, quality assurance, inspections,
contingency planning, training, and data management.
TAT services are provided by zone contractors, two of which
were recently awarded 8(a) contracts. All are managed by ERD at
headquarters. Performance periods, with options, run through
1995, with a potential value of $340 million.
-------
Response Engineering and Analytical Contract (REAC)
The Response Engineering and Analytical Contract provides
technical support to ERT in Edison, NJ. Managed by ERT, it
provides multidisciplinary support to Superfund field activities.
It is a five year contract, ending in August 1992. Although its
potential value is $102 million, we expect to spend about $58
million. The Environmental Response Team has been proactive in
its administration of this contract, for example, developing a
computerized work assignment system for statements of work that
include independent cost estimates and milestone dates.
Hazardous Materials Incident Response Training (HMIRT)
The Hazardous Materials Incident Response Training program
contracts for the development and presentation of training to
EPA, other federal agencies, and state and local organizations.
The subjects covered are health and safety certification, treat-
ment technologies, air and water sampling, risk assessment, and
other technical issues. Like the REAC contract, it is managed by
ERT.
3. Analytical Support (ESAT, CLP, SMO)
Environmental Services Assistance Teams fESAT)
The Environmental Services Assistance Teams (ESAT) contracts
provide for in-house analytical services to the regions, includ-
ing sample gathering, tracking, data review, review of Quality
Assurance Project Plans, and hands-on special analyses. These
contracts are divided into two multi-region zones, each held by a
separate contractor, awarded in September, 1991. The contracts
covers one year with three one-year options. A headquarters
project officer from the Hazardous Site Evaluation Division
(HSED) is responsible for overall contract oversight and regional
project officers are responsible for day-to-day management and
oversight, including working with the contractor "Team Manager."
The overall value for both contracts is $102.1 million over four
years.
Contract Lab Program (CLP)
The Contract Lab Program provides for firm fixed price
contracts for analyses of Superfund samples. It is designed to
meet large volume, routinely requested needs, called Routine
Analytical Services. These contracts are managed at Headquarters
by HSED. They involve about 60 laboratories, have a duration of
30 months, and involve annual costs of about $60 million, depend-
ing on regional requests.
-------
Sample Management Office (SMO)
Another analytical service contract managed by HSED in
headquarters, this contract handles the logistics of data collec-
tion and evaluation. It also handles requests for analyses that
are not routine, called Special Analytical Services. The annual
cost of this contract is approximately $20 million for Special
Analytical Services and $8 million for logistics support. It is
currently operating under a 2.5 year option period.
4. Headquarters Support
OERR's Office of Program Management (OPM) also manages eight
contract vehicles to support management, technical services, and
analytical functions. These contracts have an average life of
three years, and a total value of approximately $51 million. The
activities include on-site operation of the Superfund Docket and
documents center; collection of data for the Annual Report to
Congress; and technical and support assistance with cross-cutting
programmatic activities including the populations at risk analy-
sis, strategic planning, site assessment and NPL listing, and
Technical Assistance Grants. They also provide support in daily
management services, such as the structuring of an internal
customer service desk within OERR, and coordinating HMCRI confer-
ence exhibits.
In addition to these, there has recently been awarded the
Technical and Analytical Support for Emergency Response Activi-
ties Contract to support EPA in areas related to releases of oil
and hazardous substances. This contract his managed by the
Emergency Response Division at headquarters, and covers a range
of technical, economic, regulatory development, and implementa-
tion support for CERCLA, particularly hazardous substances and
reportable quantity (RQ) adjustments, and Oil Pollution Act
activities. The total cost for the base year and four option
years would be $34.9 million.
OERR maintains a Contracts Management Information System
listing of our contracts, project officers and financial status.
A detailed list of our current Headquarters and regional con-
tracts with their assigned project officers is attached as
Attachment 1.
III. GENERAL OERR POLICY AND TRAINING ON CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
POLICIES
OERR's policy with respect to contracts management is one of
continuous self-analysis and improvement. In 1987, for example,
OERR conducted a review of contracts management practices,
particularly as they related to management support contracts.
-------
The focus was to see whether contractors may be performing
inherently governmental functions; whether we are making effi-
cient use of government resources; and whether contractors who
also perform response work may be providing support to policy
decisions.
While no serious problems were found, several initiatives
were developed to improve contracts management. Periodic direc-
tives have been issued to implement those and other initiatives
that are developed as OERR's contracts and contract policies
evolve. Attachment 2 is a partial list of OERR's guidances and
directives on contracts management. Below is a summary of some
of the more important OERR policies.
1. Each division develops a Contract Operating Plan - This
plan is incorporated in the operating plan. This ensures that a
high level of management approves the areas suitable for con-
tracting, and that contract hours are divided equitably among
divisions.
2. Roles and responsibilities of Project Officer and Work
Assignment Manager are clearly defined - Roles are provided in
the PCMD manual and emphasized through OERR guidances and train-
ing. Attachment 3 is a sample guidance given to Work Assignment
Managers on their responsibilities with respect to headquarters-
managed contracts.
3. Evaluations of work assignments are required every
trimester - Scheduled evaluations are to ensure that problems
with performance are identified early, and where necessary
brought to management attention. An evaluation form (Attachment
4) has been developed to ensure completeness of, and consistency
among, evaluations.
4. Performance Standards reflecting contracting responsi-
bilities have been developed for Superfund Project Officers,
Deputy Project Officers, and Work Assignment Managers/Delivery
Order Officers (Attachment 5).
5. An OERR Organizational Conflicts of interest Review and
Approval Program has been established that requires that all new
work assignments under the headquarters support contracts be
reviewed for potential organizational conflicts of interest and
approved by the appropriate division director (Attachment 6).
6. Recommendations from audits of OIG and General Account-
ing Office have been, or are being, implemented. A list of
audits from OERR's audit reporting system is attached (Attachment
7).
7. To ensure that policies are widely disseminated, period-
ic updates of contract issues, policies, and procedures have been
-------
provided to headquarters and the regions. The purpose of the
CORAS Bulletin is to serve as a forum for information exchange
between EPA Headquarters program offices, the Regions, and the
Procurement and Contracts Management Division on planning,
management, and administration of Superfund contracts. (Copies
attached as Attachment 8).
TRAINING
OERR has followed up on disseminating these policies via
comprehensive training, including the following:
1. Required Training for Work Assignment Managers - OERR
has developed a specialized, mandatory training course for
headquarters Work Assignment Managers, over and above what is
provided by PCMD. It covers appropriate types of work assign-
ments, guidance for monitoring, ethical responsibilities, evalua-
tion of performance, etc. It is geared towards day-to-day
contract oversight and issues specific to Superfund contracts.
Attachment 9 is a copy of the training agenda and completion
certificate.
2. Specialized training for Regional personnel is offered -
Between April and November 1989, OERR offered WAM Training
for RPMs in eleven cities to provide over 200 RPMs and other
contract administration personnel from all ten regional
offices with the skills and knowledge they need to function
as effective work assignment managers of Superfund contrac-
tors. RPMs from the State of Maryland also attended. The
course was developed primarily for new RPMs, however,
attendees include both inexperienced and experienced RPMs.
In early 1989, the WAM Training for RPMs was incorporated
into the OSC/RPM (On Scene Coordinator/Remedial Program
Manager) Basic Training Academy. The Academy was one compo-
nent of the OSC/RPM Support Program. The Academy was de-
signed to train newly hired OSCs/RPMs in some of the basics
of the Superfund program. The Academy trained over 200 RPMs
and OSCs since the first session on contract management in
August, 1989.
In November of this year, OSWER's Technology Innovation
Office began offering training courses through its newly
established, state-of-the-art CERCLA Education Center (CEC).
Initially, courses will be taught at the North Carolina
State University, but may be offered at other locations in
the future. The CEC course curriculum is designed to build
a firm base of knowledge and facilitate a better understand-
ing of the laws, regulations, policies, and sciences that
make up the Superfund program. The CEC is intended primari-
-------
ly for OSCs, RPMs and other EPA staff involved in the
Superfund program. The CEC takes a tiered-structure ap-
proach to training, which allows participants to choose the
courses that best meet their needs.
TIO is also offering an Advanced Contracts Administration
course through the SUTI for RPMs and OSCs. OERR sent a
questionnaire out to the RPMs and because of the results and
recommendations from the RPMs OERR is participating in the
design of this course.
As followup to the ARCS Task Force recommendations to get
managers more involved in contracts implementation, OERR is
developing an executive training course on Contracts Manage-
ment Issues. This course will provide senior management
with some basic understanding of current contracts manage-
ment issues that may affect their performance and to provide
some direction on overseeing a contractor dependent program.
There will be a 2-hour condensed briefing on current con-
tracts management issues for Division Directors (ready for
delivery by May 1992) and for Branch and Section Chiefs
(ready for delivery by June 1992) a 1-day session on solving
every-day problems and contract management issues.
IV. RECENT OERR CONTRACT MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES
Again, OERR has adopted a policy of continuous improvement
in its contract management practices. Some of these activities
have involved developing long-term strategies; others have
involved issuance of guidances. Some practices were adopted as a
result of an audit or study. Below is a summary of some of the
more recent initiatives, which are at various stages of implemen-
tation.
1. Long Term Contracting Strategy
The Long-Term Contracting Strategy (LTCS) undertaken by OERR
has had the most dramatic effect on OERR policies on contracting
and oversight. A task force comprising representatives from the
ten regions, OSWER, the Office of Administration and Resource
Management, and the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization, used Total Quality Management principles to develop
a road map for the next decade of Superfund contracting. This
group examined vulnerabilities as well as future needs. The
resulting strategy and implementation plan, developed in December
of 1990, is included in the attached Federal Managers' Financial
Integrity Act (FMFIA) work plans (Attachment 10). This will
summarize some of the key recommendations of the LTCS.
-------
The task force determined that Superfund contracts would be
more effectively and efficiently managed if the majority of the
contracts were managed in the region by the individuals directing
the technical work. In addition, placing contract officer
support in those regions would improve the contracting office's
ability to work efficiently and effectively with the technical
program personnel. The delegation of contract management to the
regions is expected to strengthen performance as well as finan-
cial oversight.
Another vulnerability identified by the task force was a
lack of flexibility in the current contract structure in that
contracts were segmented to serve program areas (remedial,
removal/ etc.) rather than by function and skill. One result has
been the development of time critical/rapid response contracts to
serve both remedial and removal personnel in short-term activi-
ties. Longer-term investigative and construction management
services to the remedial, removal and enforcement areas will be
performed under Response Action Contracts (RACs) that will
replace the current ARCS and will be based on workload projec-
tions for each Region.
The increased flexibility created by contracting by function
also allows for changing program directions. Contracts struc-
tured around earlier mandates led to potential excess capacity in
some areas (e.g., ARCs) and under capacity in others (e.g., rapid
response). The new structure being implemented as a result of
the task force recommendation allows for changes in demands
across program areas.
The LTCS also addressed vulnerabilities related to competi-
tion. Large contracts tended to limit the number of firms
eligible for Superfund contracts (and also created a greater
potential for conflict of interest). The resulting strategy
focusing on regional contracts, and based on functions rather
than complex combinations of skills, is expected to increase the
number of firms obtaining Superfund contracts as well as reduce
the potential for conflicts of interest.
The LTCS is designed to reduce EPA vulnerabilities in
general, by enhancing contract oversight, providing for cost-
efficient use of contractor support, increasing competition, and
reducing the potential for conflict of interest issues.
Implementation is continuing, but to be most effective it must be
implemented in concert with other initiatives, including the
study of the ARCS program; the 30-Day Study; (both described
below) and the work of the Superfund Revitalization Team. An
OERR organization modification has been developed to facilitate
LTCS efforts, as well as to generally improve contract oversight
within OERR. A copy of that reorganization plan is attached as
Attachment 11.
-------
2. Delivery of Analytical Services Initiative
The Long Term Contracting Strategy was widely acclaimed
within the agency for changing the way the program contracts in
order to meet its future needs. A similar strategy was thought
to be needed for analytical services, hence the formation in
April, 1991 of a task force to develop a long term strategy for
the delivery of analytical services. As with the LTCS, this will
be a total quality management effort to examine Superfund's long-
term needs, the respective roles of EPA and its contractors, and
alternative delivery mechanisms for sample analysis. This task
force is expected to develop its recommendations in late 1992.
3. Contracts Labs Program Initiative
As a result of OIG audits of CLP laboratories, a review of
the CLP program was conducted by Willis Greenstreet of the Office
of Administration and Resource Management in Research Triangle
Park, NC. The objectives were to determine whether management
controls were in place, and whether they were effective. The
finding was that internal controls were in place, but were
designed to determine the analytical competence of the labs
rather than to detect fraud. The report recommended that the
program conduct six Alternative Internal Control Reviews by the
end of FY 1992, and implement an additional fifteen recommenda-
tions. Those recommendations fall generally within the catego-
ries of overall program costs; organization and management of the
program; laboratory certification; methods development; and other
considerations. These have been incorporated into OERR's FMFIA
plan (Attachment 10). We have requested additional resources to
support 3 FTEs to assist in this effort.
4. 90-Day study of ARCS
In response to public criticism directed at the management
of the Superfund ARCS contracts, a task force was established of
senior EPA managers and analysts from headquarters and the
regions to review the program and make recommendations for
improving ARCS contracts management. The final report, issued in
October, 1991, contained 32 specific recommendations, divided
into six major categories: 1) program management; 2) ARCS
capacity and utilization; 3) ARCS contract controls; 4) financial
audits and reviews; 5) award fee process; and 6) EPA management
processes and organization. Implementation plans have been
established for each recommendation, and are incorporated in
OERR's FMFIA plan (Attachment 10). A copy of the ARCS study is
also attached as Attachment 12.
An ARCS Council has also been formed to monitor the progress
of the implementation plans to continually look for opportunities
to improve ARCS contracts management. Each region will also have
an ARCS management team to ensure successful contracts manage-
10
-------
ment. In addition, a Superfund Acquisition Program Manager,
reporting directly to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of
OSWER, has been appointed to oversee Superfund acquisition
decisions and activities.
5. 30-Day Study on Accelerating Cleanups
At the same time that the ARCS study was initiated, another
effort was undertaken to look at how the Superfund cleanup
process could be accelerated. The resulting 30-day study con-
tained several recommendations related to contracting, generally
aimed at increasing the agency's flexibility in contracting for
cleanup work. Implementation plans for these recommendations are
also contained in OERR's FMFIA plan (Attachment 10).
6. Organizational Modifications to Improve Contracts Management
To provide a central focus for OERR contract management
issues, the Contracts Operations, Review and Assessment Staff
(CORAS) was established to develop and implement an integrated
approach to continuously improve OERR contracts management. A
recent realignment proposal, not yet approved, would create a
new Headquarters Contract Management Section to focus on the
eight Headquarters support contracts within OERR. (Attachment 11
describes this reorganization proposal.) Further, in the Con-
tract Laboratory Program, we have created a new section to focus
on vulnerabilities linked to that program, including contract
performance and administration.
V. PLANNED INITIATIVES TO IDENTIFY AND CORRECT POTENTIAL
VULNERABILITIES
1. Reexamine Resource Needs to Reduce Dependence on Contractors
In FY 1990, OERR conducted a detailed study of work being
performed under Superfund headquarters support contracts. This
was done in response to a recommendation contained in the 90-Day
Study of the Superfund Program that EPA begin increasing in-house
staff to reduce dependence on contractors for policy and regula-
tory development work.
Twelve contracts were selected for review, based on criteria
that included the amount of dollars involved. -The work hours
contained in hundreds of work assignments were categorized, and
the categories were prioritized for being brought in house if
additional resources were obtained.
A recommendation was made to include the FTE associated with
the top three categories in the FY 1992 budget. These categories
were 1) analysis of regulatory, policy, and legislative issues,
2) compilation of guidance to implement EPA policy, and 3)
11
-------
analysis/compilation of responses to comments on notices pub-
lished in the Federal Register. (A copy of this memorandum is
attached as Attachment 13.) While these FTEs did go forward in
the FY 1993 budget request, they.were not included in OMB's
passback. We will reexamine these needs for the FY 1994 budget
process.
2. Reexamine Resource Meeds Relative to Contracts Management
OEKR proposes that an analysis of the distribution of
contracts management resources be conducted to determine whether
these resource distributions may pose a vulnerability to
Superfund contracts management. This proposal responds to issues
raised in the regional ARCS vulnerability assessments, LTCS
implementation plans and continuing OIG and GAO Superfund con-
tracts management audits. This analysis is necessary to update
the workload models to reflect the new LTCS contract structures,
and reexamine the contracts management activity factors that
determine the resource requirements and the pricing of those
activities. This review would also examine the extent to which
current resource allocations are being devoted to contracts
management- related purposes. OERR proposes that this assessment
be conducted jointly by the Superfund Revitalization Team, OERR,
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, and PCMD, since in today's
contracting structure these elements are interdependent.
3. Examine Recommendations from Past Audits of Individual
Contracts for Application to Others
OERR contracts have been subject to numerous audits in the
last several years. (Attachment 7 is a list of those audits
conducted by the OIG or GAO.) Recommendations from those audits
have been, or are in the process of being implemented, and those
recommendations are also contained in OERR's FMFIA plan (Attach-
ment 10). As a new initiative to look for vulnerabilities in
contracts management, OERR will reexamine each recommendation to
see whether it has potential application to contracts that were
not within the scope of that audit, and implement them as neces-
sary.
4. Conduct Internal Review of Selected Contracts
OERR will undertake internal review of selected contracts,
in light of the February 28, 1992 memorandum from Christian
Holmes, Assistant Administrator of the Office of Administration
and Resource Management identifying agency vulnerabilities in
contracts management. Areas to be examined will include perfor-
mance of personal services; co-location of contractors and EPA
employees, whether at headquarters or on-site; performance of
inherently governmental functions by contractors; supervisory
involvement in contracts management; oversight of regionally-
12
-------
administered contracts; and fiscal management. We will focus on
the more high risk contracts, including several headquarters
support contracts.
OERR expects that the implementation of our on-going efforts
under the Long-Term Contracting Strategy, Delivery of Analytical
Services (DAS) Strategy and ARCS 90-day Study will serve as the
primary means of continued identification and resolution of
vulnerabilities. For example, the LTCS implementation plans
address the actions the designated lead offices will take to
oversee regional contracts. In addition, we expect such poten-
tial vulnerabilities as personal services and inherently govern-
mental functions to be examined as the Headquarters offices
create model contract Statements of Work (SOWs) and as the
regions create their individual SOWs.
One of the major evaluation factors to be used in developing
the DAS Strategy is "vulnerabilities". A committee has been
designated specifically for this purpose and will be examining
the future delivery options for such potential issues as personal
services, inherently governmental functions, contractor co-
location, and conflict of interest. Oversight of regional
contracts will also be incorporated into the DAS Strategy.
The ARCS 90-day Study implementation plan specifically
addresses the actions to follow up on the regional vulnerability
assessments that were prepared under the study. A task to
examine Headquarters and Regional management roles and responsi-
bilities, identify strengths and weaknesses and make recommenda-
tions and implement them is expected to address such issues
supervisory involvement and oversight of regional contracts.
There are numerous implementation tasks that address continuing
fiscal management.
We are unaware of additional potential vulnerabilities not
already reported in the FY 91 FMFIA "assurance letter," or being
addressed by our ongoing efforts. However, we are reviewing for
potential vulnerabilities on a continual basis, and have identi-
fied several contracts which must be carefully managed to avoid
any perception of impropriety.
In the area of vulnerability to personal services, we have
identified the Environmental Services Assistance Team (ESAT) and
the Technical Assistance Team (TAT) contracts (each involving two
"zone" contractors) as ones to which particular attention must be
paid. This is true due to the co-location of EPA and contractor
employees in laboratories (ESAT) and Regional response centers
(TAT) in some Regions.
Concerning the issue of inherently governmental functions,
we have identified the Emergency Response Division's contract to
provide analytical/technical support in the "reportable quanti-
13
-------
ties" area, as well as the CLP sample management office contract.
These contracts must also be carefully managed to assure that
contractors have no involvement in functions which are "inherent-
ly governmental."
We plan to address these issues. At the Regional level, the
Contract Operations Review and Assessment Staff (CORAS) is
planning to conduct an "assessment" in the areas of personal
services and inherent government functions. This review will
seek to determine whether there are any vulnerabilities and
whether any improvements are warranted in Regional contract
management procedures relating to contracts such as those dis-
cussed above.
5. Request that OIG Audit Major Contracts
In August of 1991, OSWER requested that the OIG perform
audits of its major contracts. A copy of that memorandum is
attached as Attachment 14. We are anxious to work with the OIG
to further review our contract management practices, and make
modifications where necessary to insure the integrity of our
contracts.
6. Implement 7MFIA Recommendations
Most of the recommendations to be implemented in the area of
contracts management are contained in OERR's FMFIA plan (Attach-
ment 10). This includes the LTCS, ARCS study, 30-day study, CLP
study, and audits by the OIG and GAO. If the proposed initia-
tives develop additional vulnerabilities, these too will be
incorporated into OERR's FMFIA obligations.
VI. SUMMARY
OERR has been actively pursuing excellence in its contracts
management. With recent emphasis on agency contracts management
policies, we intend to increase these efforts, to look for areas
of potential vulnerability through the actions described herein.
We are requesting OSWER's support on three areas discussed
in this memorandum: 1) OERR's proposal to modify its organization
to enhance contract oversight; 2) additional FTEs for contractor
oversight, as proposed in the FY 1993 budget request; and 3)
resource dollars to support 3 overceiling FTEs in the Contract
Lab Program.
14
-------
Please let me know if you have any questions on OERR con-
tracts management policies, or if you would like a briefing on
this subject.
Attachments:
1 - Headquarters and Regional contracts and Project Officers
2 - List of OERR Guidances and Directives on Contracts Manage-
ment
3 - Sample Guidance to Work Assignment Managers (WAMS)
4 - Evaluation Forms for Work Assignments
5 - Performance Standards Related to Contracts Management
6 - Conflict of Interest Review and Approval Program Summary
7 - List of OIG and GAO Audits
8 - CORAS Bulletins
9 - Certificate and Agenda for WAM Training
10 - OERR FMFIA Plan
11 - OERR Reorganization Plan to Enhance Contract Management
12 - ARCS Study
13 - Memorandum from OERR to AA, OSWER re Bringing Certain
FTE In-house
14 - Memorandum to OIG from AA, OSWER Requesting Audits of
Major Contracts
15
-------
-------
KEY REGIONAL PERSONNEL IN SUPERFUND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT
Contract
REU
ARCS
ERCS
TAT.
RT
TE8
E8AT
Headquarters
(PO.DPOrf possible)
REMI - Tracy Loy. EMAN.5201
REMII - Tracy Loy. EMAN.5201
REMIH -Tracy Loy. EMAJL5201
3088349
REMIV -FtorencaBUr.EMAft.5201
B* Zobel. EMAIL
308-8346
Barbara McDonough. EMAIL
308-8348
Zone 1 - Patricia Tidwel. EMAJL551 1
3622688
Zone 1 - Pal Hawkins. EMAIL S191
3622456
Zone 2 - Karen Torramatsu. EMAU0026
4759661
Zone 1 - Tim Fontaine
4759748
Zone 2 - Rick Webster. EMAIL
47V9703
Zone 1 - Jack Jotokian. EMAI
308-8650
Zone 2 - Jean Wright. EMAI.
308-8659
Zone 3 - Mariana Lamro. EMAI.
308-8639
Zone 4 • Nancy Deck, EMAI.
3068647
Lynn Beasley. CUAIL5449
475-8607
Zone 1 - Reg 1.2.3. A 5
Zone 2 - Reg. 4.8.10. * HQs
Region 1
Nancy Barmakian. 833- 1797
EMAIL9170
US EPA. HCP<*N7
JFK Federal BuMng
Boston. MA 02203
Nancy Barmakian. 833- 1797
EMAN.9170
Diane Keley. 833-1672
EMAft.9171
US EPA. HCP-CAN7
JFK Federal BuMng
Boston. MA 02203
John Carlson. 828-6624
EMAIL9119
US EPA
641 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
John Cartoon. 828-6624
EMAIL9119
US EPA
60 Westvtew Street
Leungton.MA 02173
Don Smith, 833-1648
EMAIL
US EPA.
JFK Federal BuMng
Boston.MA 02203
Rick Leighton. 833-1654
EUAIL9156
US. EPA
JFK Federal BuMng
Boston. MA 02203
EMAHS161
US EPA
60 Wesivtow Street
Lexington. MA 02173
Regton2
Shaheer AM. 264 2221
EMAIL9204
US EPA
26 Federal Plaza
New York. NY 10278
Jril Hacker. 264-4197
EMAIL
Fernando Rosado. 264*130
EMAIL
KerthKolar. 264-1576
EMAIL
Keith Mondno. 264-9300
EMAIL
U S EPA
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
Norm Vogelsang. 340-4346
EMAN.9283
Charles Fuzsimmons. 340-6608
EMAN.9490
US EPA
345 Courtand St. NE.
Edrson. NJ 06837
Lisa Guarneiri. 34041 80
EMAIL
US. EPA
Edison. NJ 06637
Amy Brochu. 340-6802
EMAIL
US EPA
Woodbndge Avenue
Edison. NJ 06837
Cathy Moyfc. 264 8123
EMAN.9206
ErwmSieszek. 264-4311
EMAK.
US EPA
26 Federal Plaza
New York. NY 10278
Joseph Hudek. W41\i
EMAH9252
US EPA
26 Foderal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
Regions
James McKenzie. 597-3229
EMAN.93035
US EPA
841 Chestnut Street
PMadetohia. PA 19107
Elaine Spiewak. 597 3229
EMAIL
James McKertoe. 597 3229
EMAIL93035
US EPA
641 Chestnut Street
PMadstohia. PA 19107
Rich Fetter. 597- 1369
EMAIL 9324
US EPA
641 Chestnut Street
Philadekihia. PA 19107
Charlie Kteeman. 597-4016
EMAIL 9340
US EPA
641 Chestnut Street
PMadstotM. PA 19107
Greg Hamm. 597 8229
EMAI.
US EPA
641 Chestnut Street
Phttadekihia. PA 19107
Donna McGowan. 597-8230
EMAIL
US EPA
641 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia. PA 19107
ferry Simpson. 655 5lM
EMAH.93018
Dan Stays. 652-2192
EMAIL
US EPA
639 Beslgate Road
Annapolis. MO 21401
Region 4
Ken Myer. 257 2930
EMAIL
U S EPA
345 Courtand St . NE
Atlanta. QA 30365
Man Rotbina. 257 2930
EMAIL9428
Doug Thompson. 257 2234
EMAIL
Charles Swan. 257 2234
EMAIL
U S EPA
345 Courtand St .. NE.
AtanU.GA 30365
Sharon Camp. 257 2930
EMAIL
345 Courtand St^NE.
Attanto. GA 30365
Carol Monel. 257 2930
EM*.IL9490
US ^PA
345 Courtand Si . N E
AHanU.GA 30365
Charts* Swan 257 2234
EMAIL
US EPA
345 Courtand St . NE
Arlanu. OA 30365
Keo Meyer. 257 2930
EMAIL
US EPA
345CourtandSl NE
Afanti.GA 3036S
Bobby Carrol. 546 3309
EMAI.9434
US EPA
Station Road. ASB
Athens. GA 30613
-------
-------
03/20/92 OFFICE OF EMERGENCY AND REMEDIAL RESPONSE
CONTRACT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM
CURRENT LIST OF ACTIVE PROJECT OFFICERS BY PROGRAM TYPE
Page:1
DESCRIPTION
ANALYTICAL SUPPORT
CLP QA TECH ASSISTANCE
CLP-SMO
ESAT ZONE I, REG 1-3 & 5
ESAT ZONE II, REG 4, 6-10 & HQ
TRANS SERVICES (COOLER SHIP.)
MANAGEMENT I ADMINISTRATION SUPPORT
ADVIS & ANALYT SUPP (SM BUS./EMS)
HQ SUPPORT 8(A)
MANAGEMENT & TECH SUPPORT (VIAR)
NPL-(MITRE)
REAC (ERT/WESTON)
SF MANAGEMENT SUPPORT (BAH)
SF MANAGEMENT SUPPORT (MNG)
SF MANAGEMENT SUPPORT (TMS)
TECH & ANAL SUPPORT FOR EMERG (ICF)
TECH MANAGEMENT SUPPORT (RTI)
REMEDIAL
ARC* REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARC- REG
AR, REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
1 (COM)
1 (EBASCO)
1 (LITTLE)
1 (M&E)
1 (NUS)
1 (TRC)
1 (WESTON)
2 (CDM)
2 (EBASCO)
2 (ICF)
2 (MP)
2 (TAMS)
2 (WESTON)
3 (B&V)
3 (E&E)
3 (HILL)
3 (NUS)
3 (TT)
4 (B&V)
4 (BE)
4 (CDM)
4 (EBASCO)
4 (HILL)
4 (WESTON)
5 (B&V)
5 (DONOHUE)
5 (E&E)
5 (HILL)
5 (PRC)
PROJECT OFFICER NAME
• BARRON, JAMES
• WILTSHIRE, PATRICIA
• SIMPSON, TERRY
• SIMPSON, TERRY
• BEASLEY, LYNN
• VAN EPPS, BETTI
• VAN EPPS, BETTI
• VAN EPPS, BETTI
• WIAZ, JUNE
• CIBULSKIS, BOB
• HAN A VAN, FRAN
• MCMASTER, JIM
• VAN EPPS, BETTI
• WAITERS, 'HUBERT
• HANAVAN, FRAN
• BARMAKIAN, NANCY
• BARMAKIAN, NANCY
• HORAHAN, HEIDI
• BARMAKIAN, NANCY
• KELLEY, DIANE
• KELLEY, DIANE
• KELLEY, DIANE
• KOLLAR, KEITH
• HACKER, JILL
• MONCINO, KEITH
• KOLLAR, KEITH
• ROSADO, FERNANDO
• HACKER, JILL
• SPIEWAK, ELAINE
• SPIEWAK, ELAINE
• SPIEWAK, ELAINE
• MCKENZIE, JIM
• MCKENZIE, JIM
• SWAN, CHARLES
• THOMPSON, DOUG
• THOMPSON, DOUG
• THOMPSON, DOUG
• THOMPSON, DOUG
• SWAN, CHARLES
• NORMAN, CARL
• VOGTMAN, PATRICIA
• SHORT, THOMAS
• NATHAN, STEPHEN
• NORMAN, CARL
-------
03/20/92 OFFICE OF EMERGENCY AND REMEDIAL RESPONSE
CONTRACT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM
CTRRBMT LIST Of AOfTVB PROJECT OFFICERS BY PROGRAM TYPE
Page:2
DESCRIPTION
REMEDIAL (cont.)
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
ARCS REG
REM VI
REMOVAL
5 (WESTON)
5 (WW)
6-8 (COM)
6-8 (FD)
6-8 (HILL)
6-8 (JACOBS)
6-8 (MK)
6-8 (SVERDUP)
6-8 (URS)
6-8 (WESTON)
9,10 (BE)
9,10 (E6E)
9,10 (HILL)
9,10 (ICF)
9,10 (URS)
9,10 (WESTON)
ERGS ZONE III, REG 5
ERCS ZONE IVA, REG 6-8
ERCS ZONE IVB, REG 9,10
REG ERCS REG 3
REG ERCS REG 3
REG ERCS REG 3
REG ERCS REG 4
REG ERCS REG 4
REG ERCS REG 4
REG ERCS REG 4
REG ERCS/EMERG, REG 4-
TAT 8(A), ZONE I
TAT 8(A), ZONE II
TAT ZONE I, REG 1-4 ERT &
TAT ZONE II, REG 6-10
DIOXIN STORAGE BLDGS, REG 7
LAB RMVL, REG 7
OIL & HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES TECH. SU
S.E. WOOD PRESERVING BIOREMEDIATION
(EHR&T)
(ET)
(GES)
(ET)
(FOUR SEASONS)
(HAZ)
(OHM)
(OHM)
HQ
PROJECT OFFICER NAMH
• NATHAN, STEPHEN
• VOGTMAN, PATRICIA
• MOREY, DEBI
• BOSS, EVE
• HARGREAVES, GREG
• MOREY, DEBI
• MASHBURN, JEFF
• MOREY, DEBI
• MASHBURN, JEFF
• BOSS, EVE
• MITGUARD, MATT
• LABAW, JOANNE
• STERN, ROBERT
• NIKZAT, SHERRY
• MITGUARD, MATT
• LABAW, JOANNE
• BLAIR, FLORENCE
• BRASHER, CHARLES
• STAFFORD, LARRY
• LONGSTON, BILL
. FETZER, RICHARD
• FETZER, RICHARD
• FETZER, RICHARD
• BOTTS, COLETTE
• BOTTS, COLETTE
• BOTTS, COLETTE
• BOTTS, COLETTE
• BOTTS, COLETTE
• WEIGEL, GREG
• MALONEY, JENNIFER
• HAWKINS, PATRICIA
- TOMIMATSU, KAREN
• STAFFORD, LARRY
• HAMPTON, DAVID
• CUNNINGHAM, JOHN
• GARCIA, FRANCIS
' "N,
J
-------
.
USB
MEMORANDUM
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
MAR 24 1992
OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
SUBJECT: OSW Contracts Management Action Plan
FROM: Sylvia K. Lowrance, Direct
Office of Solid Waste
TO: Richard Guimond, Deputy Assistant Administrator
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
The attached is our response to the Administrator's directive
to assess the use of contractors and to develop action plans to
address vulnerabilities. As I conveyed to you recently, OSW has
had an ongoing action plan designed to address our problems and
vulnerabilities in contracts management. We have had a significant
amount of success, and we believe we have a strong foundation in
place to further strengthen our contracts management activities.
Based on the Administrator's directive, we have outlined a number
of actions we plan to initiate immediately, most of which were
items already included in our ongoing action plan, but with
accelerated timefraroes.
My staff has offered its assistance to Judy Kertcher as she
develops an overall OSWER response.
Attachment
cc: OSW Division Directors
OSW Deputy Division Directors
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
-------
Office of Solid Waste
Contracts Management Program Description
OSW has faced some incredible statutory and court-ordered
deadlines in the past few years. As workload increased, FTE only
moderately increased while extramural dollars increased
dramatically to accommodate the workload. This lower than usuual
FTE to extramural dollar ratio in the program led the program to
become concerned in 1988 about its contract management practices.
This concern was furthered by a 1989 Inspector General's audit
report on contracts management in the Office of Solid Waste. That
report identified a number of serious contracts problems that
needed immediate attention and made recommendations for improving
contracts management that ranged from more and better training for
contract managers and improved oversight of contractors, to more
closely monitored work assignments and shorter turn-around times
for processing to prevent unauthorized work.
In 1988 OSW initiated a comprehensive program, in cooperation
with PCMD, to dramatically improve its management of contracts.
Since then OSW has been committed to continuous improvement to deal
with its unique contracting issues. Steps taken that have made a
significant difference have included centralization of contract
administration in Divisions to fewer, better trained and more
experienced Project Officers combined with putting in place
accountability mechanisms, an automated tracking system, and
establishment of better and more regular communications with the
Procurement and Contracts Management Division (PCMD) through an OSW
Project Officers workgroup. Finally, the addition of a full-time
FTE dedicated to overseeing and monitoring OSW's contracting
activities has turned OSW's contracts management program into one
of the stronger ones.
OSW continues to face very dramatic program expectations.
Contractor resources are critical to the accomplishment of our
mission. Equally critical is practicing good contracts management.
We have proven through our commitment the past few years that a
balanced approach to the administrative as well as the technical
requirements of our work does result in improved quality of work.
For example, OSW's Office-specific training program for contracts
managers along with the development of standard operating
procedures and Office-specific policies for managing contracts is
building a cadre of informed and knowledgeable contracts managers
who not only understand the necessity of practicing proper
administration but who are performing more consistently in this
manner. Management and communications processes also put in place
over time are helping all members of the contracts management team
to identify and more clearly understand their respective roles and
responsibilities.
-------
But this is only the beginning. Each year OSW continues to
identify through the development of its annual contracts management
workplan, areas that need correction and strengthening. OSW is
committed to continuous improvement and vigilance of its contracts
management operations. Attached is the supporting information on
the status of OSW contracting activities.
-------
ATTACHMENTS
A ... List of OSW Contracts and Delivery Orders
B ... Summary of Existing Internal Controls
C ... Vulnerabilities declared under FMFIA
D ... Potential Vulnerabilities
E ... Description of Oversight of Regional Contracts
F . .. Plan for Conducting Internal Review of Contracts
G ... Potential Impact of Termination of CSC contract
-------
-------
Contract No
Attachment A
OSW Level of Effort (LOE) CONTRACTS AS OF 3/92
Contractor Name Project Officer
68-W9-0040
68-W9-0041
68-WO-0025
68-W9-0028
68-W9-0091
68-W9-0081
68-WO-0009
68-WO-0032
68-W9-0027
68-W9-0011
68-WO-0042
68-W9-0068
68-W9-0072
68-W9-0069
68-W9-0088
68-WO-0029
68-WO-0039
A.T. Kearney
PRC
SAIC
Labat-Anderson
SAIC
ICF
ICF
RTI
SAIC
SAIC
ICF
Versar
Radian
Radian
Labat-Anderson
Hydrogeologic
Booz, Allen & Hamilton
Allen Pearce
Allen Pearce
Kent Anderson
Carlos Lago
Bertha Harvell
Dave Levy
Doug Ruby
Norma Hughes
Norma Hughes
Bertha Harvell
Wendel Miser
Angela Wilkes
Angela Wilkes
Angela Wilkes
Lynn DePont
Norma Hughes
Barbara Roth
(Award fee)
(Award fee)
(Award fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Fixed fee)
(Award fee)
N.B. OSW has a number of Work Assignments in contracts outside OSW.
-------
3/20/92
MANAGER
Michael
Shannon
Bertha
Harvell
Lynn
Depont
ORD
Attachment A - continued
OSW Delivery Orders
TITLE
RCRIS/BRS
Regional
Data Handling
RCRIS/BRS &
Regional Data
Handling
Conference
Support
CONTRACTOR
CSC
CSC
CSC
Univ. Research
System Support CSC
RCRA Docket LAI
Modelling Support
DO number
68-WO-0043
DO 437
68-WO-0043
DO 357
68-WO-0043
DO 111
68-W8-0414
68-WO-0043
68-W9-0052
68-C1-0024
-------
Attachment B
Office of Solid Waste
Existing Controls for Contracts Management
The single most important element in ensuring that internal controls work is the
OSW Ombudsman for contracts management who acts as the focal point for handling
process issues and problems. OSW has instituted contracts management controls at two
different levels. Controls for managers are contained within the FMFIA controls.
Controls for Project Officers and for Work Assignment Managers are contained in Nuts
& Bolts: Managing Work Assignments in OSW as well as the OSW Project Officers
jide.
Below is sample list of major controls in place for work assignments on level of effort
contracts:
1. Work Assignment Manager(WAMVProject Officer (TO) Certification Form:
o Certifies that person working on contract and/or work assignment has
completed required training. This form required with submission of all new
contracts and work assignment requests.
2. Work Assignment Manager/ Project Officer Performance Standards:
o All Work Assignment Managers and Project Officers are required to have
performance standards reflecting their responsibilities in contracts management in
their performance standards.
o Model performance standards on contracts management for managers are
currently under development.
o Major Roles & Responsibilities of each member of contracts team are clearly
outlined in Nuts & Bolts: Managing Work Assignments in OSW.
3. Standard Outline and Language for Work Assignments:
o A standard outline and standard paragraphs required for all OSW work
assignments capture the major important elements required for all work
assignments.
4. QSW Estimating or Pricing Forms:
o OSW has developed standard pricing forms that are required for each OSW
work assignment.
5. QSW Work Assignment Request Form:
o This OSW form requires sign-off by the WAM, technical and programmatic
review sign-off by the WAM's Branch Chief, contract compliance review sign-off
-------
by the Project Officer, and overall review sign-off by the PO's Branch Chief
before final sign-off by the Contracting Officer.
6. OSW Work Plan Approval Form:
o This OSW form requires the same sign-offs as no. 5.
7. ADP Concurrence Form:
o This OSW form requires certification by the WAM that ADP services are or are
not required for a particular work assignment.
8. Finger Tip Filing Plan:
o All WAMs are required to keep an official work assignment file for each work
assignment. The plan explains WAM responsibilities and outlines what
documents must be kept in the file as well as how the file must be arranged.
9. Voucher Verification Checklist:
o All OSW WAMs are required to verify costs incurred on their particular work
assignments each month; note discrepancies and work with contractor and PO
(and Contracting Officer if necessary) to resolve problems.
10. Work Assignment Manager's Report on Deliverables:
o This OSW form is completed for each deliverable described in the work
assignment. In addition to quality ranking a deliverable, the form indicates the
location of each product.
11. Work Assignment Close-out Request and Final Evaluation:
o The forms are completed at the end of a work assignment.
-------
Attachment C
AGENCY-LEVEL WEAKNESSES/CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
CATS Tracking Number;
91 - 30
Assessable Unit/AU #;
1903 - PSPD; 1904 - WMD; 1905 - CAD;1913 - MISWD;1914 - CABD
Title of Agency-level Weakness and Description;
CONTRACT MANAGEMENT: OSW will develop and implement
standardized recordkeeping procedures for Work Assignment
Managers.
Year Identified and Source of Discovery;
OIG Audit: Management of Contracts Supporting the Office of
Solid Waste; E1XM*8-11-047-9100209; 03/89
Critical Milestones in Corrective Action;
I
1
2
3
4
5
MILESTONE
Evaluate current practices
PROJECTED
COMPLETION
12/90
Develop standardized record- 4/91
keeping procedures
Train OSW staff
Implement new procedures
Review implementation to
assess effectiveness
8/91
9/91
4/92
STATUS
COMPLETED
COMPLETED
COMPLETED
COMPLETED
ON SCHEDULE
Budget Implications. If Any;
N/A
Corrective Action Plan Status Updates;
o September 30. 1991. Status Update; No Change
o December 31. 1991. Status Update; No Change
o March 31. 1992. Status Update: No change
o June 30. 1992. Status Update;
-------
-------
Attachment D
OSW Contracts Management Program
Potential Vulnerabilities
During the past three years, OSW has aggressively pursued controlling potential
vulnerabilities through the establishment of a full-time FTE position to provide oversight
and guidance to programs, through the creation of the Project Officer workgroup to
identify and correct early on, potentially vulnerable activities, and the provision of OSW-
specific training for WAMs. In addition, steps have been taken to put in place a set of
standard operating procedures for handling routine contracts management activities
across OSW. All these activities have created a heightened level of awareness for
contracts managers about what constitutes a potentially vulnerable activity and as a
result, we have been able to identify and substantially reduce or mitigate the number of
potential vulnerabilities in OSW contracts.
Internal contracts management oversight activities have identified several
potentially vulnerable areas where we have (1) already addressed potential vulnerabilities
or (2) are in the process of reviewing potential problems. In the first instance, focus
groups were formed as a result of specific situations or problems to develop guidelines
and examples that can be shared office-wide. For example, an issue surfaced recently
around contractor costs for return of CBI materials. A focus group reviewed the issue
and developed standard language on CBI costs that is now included in all OSW work
assignments that contain CBI. Other focus groups have reviewed conflict of interest
(COI) and information collection request (ICR) issues that are resulting in more specific
and clearer guidance to work assignment managers.
Challenges still remain. With respect to potential problems, we have already
identified several areas that are potentially vulnerable and require clarification or
reinforcement to reduce their potential for vulnerability. These include:
o The "Hotline" - Clarifying again the internal chain of command in terms of
how OSWER staff interact with the contractor.
o Working with sub-contractors - Reinforcing once again how OSW staff
should interact through the prime contractor when working with sub-
contractors.
o Re-emphasizing the respective roles and responsibilities of Project Officers,
Work Assignment Managers and their supervisors.
o Re-visiting and re-clarifying the relationship between OSW staff and
contractors in terms of how we operate and communicate on a regular
basis.
-------
Attachment F presents our plan for addressing these potentially problematic
areas.
In response to specific potential vulnerabilities discussed in Christian Holmes'
memo of February 28, 1992:
o OSW has reviewed the issue of personal services. We do not believe that we
have a personal services problem but have taken steps to eliminate any
appearance. OSW has a total of eight on-site contractors at this time, plus nine
who are located in the RCRA Regulatory Docket library. All on-site contractors
and their work spaces are clearly identified. One additional work assignment
where we were unable to resolve the appearance of personal services and co-
location, we have terminated.
o OSW has worked for the past year to assist work assignment managers to
understand and recognize and thus avoid "prohibited and sensitive" contracting
areas. The key to this is strengthening the work assignment and the work
assignment monitoring process. This has been done by developing a standard
outline required for OSW work assignments along with standard paragraphs for
critical areas and providing Project Officers with the tools to improve review of
work assignments.
o A number of OSW supervisors have attended the OSW-specific contracts
management training sessions during the past year. Some have also attended the
one day course for supervisors of contracts managers. OSW is currently
developing its own OSW-specific orientation to contracts management for
supervisors. Model performance standards for supervisors are also under
development.
o OSW is currently reviewing our oversight of Regionally managed contracts in
two areas. The first deals with the RCRA implementation contracts that entail
permitting support; over the past year extensive work has been done with
Regional Project Officers that has resulted in much improved management
controls. In addition, other possible problem areas identified in the current
contracts are being addressed in the upcoming re-competes. The second is the
CSC National Delivery Order that assists Regions with data entry support. Steps
are being taken now to improve controls in the Regions until this delivery order
can be moved to the Regions.
o OSW is well into a project that will greatly improve monitoring of OSW
contracts at the Division level. OSW Project Officers have located a contract
work assignment and financial tracking system in another part of the Agency that
is being tailored to OSWs needs and is scheduled to be brought on line in each
Division by September, 1992. In the meantime, Project Officers in each Division
currently monitor work tasked against obligations and routinely provide status
reports to managers.
-------
Attachment E
Description of Oversight of Regional Contracts
OSW Headquarters works with the Regions on two major efforts — RCRA
Implementation Contracts (RIC) and RCRA Information Systems data entry support
(RCRIS). The RIC involves two large contracts managed out of Headquarters. The
data entry support for RCRA Information Systems is partially funded and tasked using
delivery orders also managed out of Headquarters.
RCRA Implementation Contracts
Oversight of RCRA Implementation Contracts (RIC) that support OSW's
permitting activities, is carried out by a Headquarters Project Officer (HPO) who works
closely with designated Regional program staff. The HPO reviews and approves all work
assignments and work plans, reviews and monitors costs, and ensures that all
administrative requirements of the contracts are met. Detailed Progress and Financial
Reports are reviewed monthly and Regional staff raise any issues or problems to the
HPO if they can not be resolved at the Regional level. There are two major RIC
contracts (A.T. Kearney and PRC) and both are award fee type contracts. Performance
Evaluation Board (PEB) meetings that include Regional Project Officers are held every
four months to assess and evaluate contractor performance to determine eligibility for
award fee. In addition, conference calls and semi-annual meetings of all Regional
Projects Officers with the Headquarters Project Officer and and others involved in
contracts oversight, are held to discuss issues and solve problems. The fact that OSW
has a designated Headquarters Project Officer and that both RIC contracts are award
fee ensures close oversight of these contracts.
RCRA Information Systems Support
OSW and OWPE currently utilize a National Delivery Order contract (CSC)
managed out of the Office of Information Resources Management (OIRM) to partially
fund data entry services to the Regions for EPA's National Data Systems.
The Headquarters Delivery Order Project Officer has put in place controls and
approval mechanisms that monitor basic activities in the Regions. The DOPO
coordinates with a designated EPA liaison in each Region. The management of this
project has been carefully assessed. As a result the Headquarters Delivery Order will be
terminated. The actual data entry functions will continue in the Region under their
Regional contract vehicles.
-------
-------
Attachment F
OSW PLAN REVIEW OF CONTRACTS
OSW had anticipated a review of contracting activities
during the Spring of 1992. This will be implemented as
scheduled.
Oversight
The OSW Ombudsman will review OSWs overall contracting
strategy and contracts oversight systems to identify strengths
and weaknesses, review training and information needs, make
recommendations on proposed courses of action and assist
Divisions in their review of contracts.
Divisions
Division-specific plans will be developed through quality
action teams (QATs) at the Division level to review contracts in
that specific Division. Each Division QAT will consist of
Project Officers, their supervisors, representative WAMs from
each Section and/or Branch and one Senior Manager from that
Division.
During the next three months each Division QAT will conduct
a comprehensive review of its Division's contracts and work
assignments or delivery orders. The OSW Ombudsman will kick-off
each Division's focus team by reviewing with them OSW's checklist
of activities for review. The Ombudsman will also be available
as a resource to each QAT to clarify requirements and assist in
the resolution of issues. This review will consist of the
following elements:
1. Review all contracting activities within a Division and
ensure compliance with EPA ORDER 1900.2 regarding prohibited
and sensitive contracting activities.
2. Review and strengthen all controls for any sensitive
contracting activities.
3. Review accountability mechanisms in place and ensure
that all parties understand their respective role in the
accountability process.
4. Review implementation and ensure compliance with all
OSW standard operating procedures as outlined in Nuts &
Bolts.
6. Review and identify training and information needs on
contracts management for their particular Division.
5. Review Division's overall contracting strategy in
view of program needs and demands.
-------
Each Division will provide to the Office Director by June
30, 1992, a written report on findings and recommendations and a
plan of action for addressing issues.
-------
Attachment G
Potential Impact of Termination of CSC Contract
Following Agency policy to contract out information services, OSW participates in
a number of Delivery Orders through an Office of Information Resources Management
(OIRM) contract with CSC ... the most significant of these are the National Delivery
Orders that support the RCRA Information Systems (RCRIS) data services discussed on
the next few pages.
In addition, there is a smaller but nonetheless important CSC Delivery Order
where work stoppage would result in a considerable handicap to productivity. OSW's
communication services depend heavily on automated systems that handle a multiplicity
of information from various document tracking systems to large mailing lists. OSW
communications services utilizes from $40,000 to $50,000 annually on developing
software programs and enhancements to meet its special tracking and data handling
needs.
Termination of the CSC contract would effectively mean that work could not
continue. There are no available FTE to absorb the workload in systems development
now provided through the CSC Delivery Order for systems enhancements for OSW
communications services. Depending on how the issue of support for automated
communications services is resolved, it could take from six to eighteen months once
resources become available to achieve current momentum.
See the following pages for discussion of potential impact on National RCRA
Information Systems.
-------
-------
POTENTIAL IMPACT OP TERMINATION OP CSC CONTRACT
ON NATIONAL RCRA INFORMATION SYSTEMS
A. BACKGROUND
The RCRA program, by legislative mandate, is largely
delegated to States for program delivery. Regions manage
program areas for which States have not yet received formal
authorization. The Resource Conservation and Recovery
Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System
(BRS) are the primary tools these State and Regional users
employ nationwide to manage, monitor and report on all
subtitle C hazardous waste RCRA program activities.
From the inception of the RCRA program, the hazardous waste
component has always been perceived by Congress and the
public as a critical environmental responsibility. RCRIS
and BRS exist because of the ongoing need to have
comprehensive automated systems which support the primary
regulatory mission and ensure a consistent, national basis
for operating the hazardous waste program.
State and Regional program implementers use these systems on
a daily basis to record program accomplishments and obtain
essential management information concerning program status.
EPA Headquarters relies on these systems to carry out
fundamental program oversight responsibilities and provide
information to members of Congress, and to Freedom of
Information Act requests from the public.
For both RCRIS and BRS, the CSC contract provides mission
critical operational support for system maintenance,
software enhancement (including development of technical
specifications), librarian functions and management of
system updates, performance optimization, user support
(including support activities during meetings and
conferences), national training, documentation, and database
management.
B. POTENTIAL DELAYS IN WORK
I. Basic Contract Support Issues
a. The Agency currently has no other Agencywide or other
separate vehicle against which the full scope of necessary
services to support RCRIS and BRS could be obtained.
b. National RCRA information systems currently draw on a range
of contractual services and level of funding such that
replacing them would involve a major procurement effort.
-------
B. POTENTIAL DELAYS IN WORK (cont.)
I. Basic Contract Support Issues (cont.)
c. Under current contracting assumptions there will be a period
of not less than eighteen months before replacement contract
services may be projected to be available. During this
time, all national information support services will cease.
It is not too strong to state that such a disruption will
have a disastrous effect on the ability of EPA and States to
effectively fulfill their legal mandates relating to the
RCRA subtitle C program.
d. EPA recently underwent a major transition phase moving these
technical services and support activities to CSC. This
occurred when the previous contractor (PRC) was still
available. This enabled the transition to proceed with a
relatively smooth hand-off of functions and knowledge from
one contractor to another.
d. The projections for delay in the following sections reflect
the knowledge gained from this recent, relevant experience.
However, there would be a crucial difference. In the event
of CSC termination, there would be no accessible base of
prior contractor knowledge and skills with which to
facilitate the assumption of new duties by a replacement
contractor. Clearly this will increase the difficulty of
re-establishing technical support. This greatly increases
the likelihood that delays will extend beyond the
assumptions shown here.
e. The delay assumptions which follow are on top of the minimum
eighteen month disruption noted above related to re-
establishing basic contract mechanisms.
II. System Maintenance and Software Enhancement
a. EPA has no resources internally available to support these
fundamental maintenance activities upon which the systems
depend. Termination of the CSC contract will immediately
halt all such activities until qualified replacement
services are available with the necessary knowledge of the
program activities supported by the systems and mastery of
all application software and operating features.
-------
B. POTENTIAL DELAYS IN WORK (cont.)
II. System Maintenance and Software Enhancement (cont.)
b. Any software problems (either internal or system level) or
new functional requirements which may arise from program
needs will remain unaddressed until such replacement
services have commenced work and have successfully begun to
address backlogged items.
c. Given the scale and complexity of these two national
systems, delay in work (i.e. putting into production the
results from programming work) may conservatively be
projected at not less than six months from the time new
contract resources are available to be accessed. Truly
responsive, efficient operations will almost certainly not
be achieved for an additional six months to a year beyond
that point.
III. Librarian Functions
a. Control over changes to software must be carefully managed
and monitored to ensure reliable operations. The CSC
contract supports operational activities for this basic
system management function. EPA staff establish system
policy, procedures, operational guidance, and provide
oversight to ensure proper execution of librarian
responsibilities.
b. From a technical perspective, EPA staff would be capable of
carrying out all librarian functions. However, given that
the successful execution of librarian operations is
inextricably bound up with software development and
production activities, it is more appropriate for this work
to be carried out by those who are contractually responsible
for guaranteeing the operational functionality and
reliability of the software.
c. Delay in carrying out librarian operations may reasonably be
projected to involve not less than one month from renewed
availability of technical support resources.
IV. Performance Optimization
a. RCRIS and BRS are newly implemented systems replacing prior
generation software. Full production operations have
coincided with ongoing constraints to Agency mainframe
resources. These constraints have made it necessary to
pursue system optimization activities to a degree that might
-------
B. POTBKTIAL DBLAY8 IN WORK (COnt.)
IV. Performance Optimization (cont.)
otherwise not have been so critical. As things now stand
without_implementing significant optimization measures,
users will continue to face unacceptable response and system
performance.
b. Under the technical system support services of the CSC
contract, extensive efforts are currently underway to
continue and expand optimization measures for RCRIS and BRS.
Unless these optimization measures are brought to successful
completion not only will RCRA systems begin to degrade, but
the performance of other national systems residing on the
Agency mainframe will collectively suffer as all contend for
decreasing availability of limited resources.
c. The intensely technical nature of this optimization work
requires a comprehensive understanding of the most intricate
operating characteristics of RCRIS and BRS. EPA does have
some access to relevant technical support under other
contract vehicles. However, their skills primarily address
general system level operations. None currently know RCRIS
and BRS at a level sufficient to support this activity to
the degree necessary.
d. Delay in work from lack of access to fully qualified, fully
knowledgeable replacements will be not less than three
months from the time they become available.
v. User Support
a. Under the CSC contract, EPA funds a national toll-free
telephone hotline support system for State and Regional
system users and managers. Support covers a wide range of
activities from requests for copies of documentation, to
general guidance on how to work with the system, to
intensive trouble-shooting assistance if problems should
arise with the system or the data. The current User Support
component requires multiple skilled system and data
technicians on extended shift operations. Contract
termination would also disrupt the underlying toll-free
communications services. These would have to be re-
established as part of new contract services.
b. This support function would cease immediately upon
termination of the contract. EPA has no other avenues to
provide this support.
-------
B. POTENTIAL DELAYS IN WORK (cont.)
V. User Support (cont.)
c. Delay in work would vary depending upon the nature of the
user's requirements. Routine calls such as requests for
copies of documents could be handled readily once new
contract resources would be available. Delay in effective
troubleshooting assistance will almost certainly extend at
least six months from commencement of work.
VI. National Training
a. EPA has a standing commitment to provide a variety of
periodic training for the national RCRIS and BRS user
community. CSC supports the development of training
programs and materials, and is also responsible for the
delivery of training at user sites nationally as well as at
Headquarters.
b. At the present time, EPA is developing new comprehensive
training initiatives for RCRIS, and has recently implemented
new training to support BRS. With RCRIS now in full
production nationally, regular training plays an
increasingly important role in ensuring continuity of
operations and quality of data.
c. EPA has no other avenues to provide comparable technical
systems training with RCRIS and BRS content. Contract
termination would severely disrupt the current progress on
this important dimension of system support.
d. Depending upon when any hypothetical contract termination
might occur, delay in training support delivered to end
users could easily extend to a full year from the point when
new services are available.
VIII. Documentation
a. Under the CSC (and predecessor) contract EPA has devoted
considerable effort and resources towards developing a broad
range of documentation to support users, system managers,
and system developers. These are living documents which
require ongoing revision and updating as maintenance occurs
and enhancements are incorporated into existing functions.
-------
B. POTENTIAL DELAYS IK WORK (cont.)
VIII. Documentation (cont.)
b. Beyond existing documentation, EPA has identified the need
to develop and implement a new series of documentation tools
which will assist non-technical program managers in making
better use of the information available in the databases.
Initial activity is currently underway on this phase of new
documentation development.
c. These new initiatives in particular require the services of
technical writers who also have a practical understanding of
the kinds of information requirements and requests faced by
RCRA program staff and managers. This requires an in-depth
knowledge of complex data requests and the ways in which
information products may be used for program management and
operational purposes. Successful documentation tools must
reflect an astute awareness of technical issues, data
structures, and program activity, and communicate
information in a manner that will be clear to people who may
not necessarily be skilled in system issues or terminology.
d. EPA does not have a pool of technical writers with extensive
knowledge of both RCRA information and RCRA systems who
would be able to assume this work.
e. Delay in documentation work will range from a minimum of one
month from availability of new contract resources (in cases
involving simple insertions and updates to existing
documentation) to over a year for new documentation
initiatives and the more complex products involved with
technical and system level documentation.
IX. Database Management
a. RCRIS and BRS operations involve extensive updating and
complex movement of data among different dimensions of
multiple databases. Careful administration of system
security is also critical not only for general principles of
good system management but also because RCRIS contains
enforcement sensitive data. Regional EPA staff generally
manage the majority of day to day system administration
activities in cooperation with a national Database
Administrator who has the responsibility for overall system
management and security policies and procedures.
-------
B. POTENTIAL DELAYS IN WORK (cont.)
IX. Database Management (cont.)
b. CSC provides essential operational support for database
management functions. These activities are closely tied to
User Support and System Maintenance functions, but involve
separate and distinct hands-on dealing with database files
which are not routinely part of those other activities.
Given the newness of RCRIS and BRS and the varying degrees
of user skills, these database management activities
supported by CSC have been absolutely critical to the
ongoing operations of the systems. This support is
particularly critical during periods of intense updating
(for instance in relation to quarterly STARS updates).
c. Delay in work for these absolutely critical functions will
be non-trivial. It is unrealistic to assume a new
contractor would be able to take on these activities at a
full performance level right away, given the scope of the
databases involved and the nature of the operations which
occur. An individual with a requisite general knowledge and
skills (even at a high level) would still require
significant time to become fully adept at the
responsibilities of the position. It would almost certainly
take at least six months from commencement of new contract
support before work could be taken on at the current level
of performance.
C. CONCLUSION
The result of CSC contract termination at this point will
mean near complete disruption of regular operations for
national RCRA information systems for nearly two years, and
from that point an additional one to two years before a
point has been reached which would be comparable to current
operations.
-------
-------
'f
\
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
DRAFT
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: OUST's Contracts Management
FROM: David Ziegele, Director
Office of Underground Storage Tanks
TO: Judy Kertcher, Director
Resources and Information Management Staff
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
In response to your March 17, 1992 memorandum regarding
management of contracts, attached is OUST's submission. First,
we attach a table which lists each of our contracts and includes
the following information: the general area of support;
beginning and end dates of the contract; name of the project
officer; the total capacity of the contract and amount funded to
date; and principal work assignment managers (where applicable).
Second, we have addressed the remaining issues, such as internal
controls, vulnerabilities, etc., in bullet format, beginning on
the second page of the attachment. Finally, OUST's
representative to OSWER's Quality Assurance Team is Karen
Ellenberger.
Please call Karen (at 308-8862) or me if you have any
questions regarding the information we've submitted regarding
OUST's contracts management.
Attachment
DRAFT
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Contractors to the Office of Underground Stor
'LIST CONTRACTOR
.'ONTRACT NO.
CF Inc.
Iconomics
.8-W9-0082
GENERAL AREA
OF SUPPORT
Analyses of costs,
economic impacts &
benefits of policies
and action pertaining
to UST and LUST
programs.
Provides technical,
programmatic,and
institutional assis-
tance in implementing
UST and LUST programs.
Work is focussed in
three priority areas:
state program approval;
leak detection compliance
and enforcement; and
corrective action.
Midwest Research i.d. and evaluate
CONTRACT
BEGIN/END OF
10/1/89-9/30/92
PROJ. OFFICER
Stephanie Bergnu
308-8879
CF Inc.
implementation
Support
,8-WO-0024
5/25/90-5/24/93
Brenda Smith
308-8870
3/1/90-2/28/93
Institute(MRI)
Technical
68-WO-0015
Nancy Low &
Associates(NL&A)
Comm. & Mktg.
Support
68-WO-0030
methods and techno-
logies to prevent and
detect leaks from USTs
and perform corrective
action after leaks.
Support for market
research and analysis,
preparation of communi-
cation plans and marketing
strategies, production
and distribution of
outreach materials,
and project evaluation.
Vinay Kumar
308-8872
6/29/90-6/30/93
Debbie RutherJ
308-8864
-------
Internal Controls
OUST has a number of internal controls in place which apply
to all of our contracts. Listed below are the types of controls
OUST exercises in managing our contracts.
Work Assignment Managers
routinely provide input to the project officers on
contractor's performance (technical quality of products,
timeliness of delivery, compliance with budget) on specific
work assignments
maintain frequent communications with contractor's project
managers to provide clear direction on work assignment
requirements and feedback on contractor's performance under
the work assignment
Project Officers
have all taken the required project officer training offered
through the EPA Institute and are certified to serve in that
capacity
are senior level employees with extensive contracts
management experience
communicate regularly with the contracting
specialist/officer to keep abreast of issues and events
germane to OUST's contracts
have clear understanding of OUST's expectations for project
officers—standards are detailed in each project officer's
performance agreement
conduct monthly meetings with contractor's project managers
and an OUST Branch Chief who represents our Management Team
to review performance on work assignments, identify issues,
and take remedial action to ensure quality work is performed
on a timely basis at a reasonable cost
review work assignments, work plans, and modifications to
ensure the effort requested of the contractor fits within
the scope of work of the contract and does not request
contractors to undertake work which is prohibited or
inappropriate
Work Assignment Managers and Project Officers
review monthly progress reports against invoices prior to
actual payment, ensuring that charges are correct,
appropriate, and conform to requirements in the contract
-------
issue and track specific subtasks under broader work
assignments to allow closer management of work and ensure
that deliverables are of high technical quality, within
budget, and on time
Branch Chief/Operating Funds Officer/Management Team Advisor on
Contracts Management
meets with project officers to discuss performance of
contractors, identify issues and potential problem areas,
and determine remedial steps so as to ensure OUST receives
high quality deliverables which are reasonably priced on a
timely basis
ensures internal controls for sound financial management are
followed
o reviews and approves work assignments to ensure
obligation of funds is consistent with OUST's FY92
operating plan as developed and approved by OUST's
Management Team
meets with OUST's Office Director and other senior managers
to discuss significant activities and issues related to
OUST's contracts management
reviews and signs all Action Request Forms (for issuing work
assignments and modifications and approving work plans) as
part of the standard review and approval chain, which also
includes: work assignment manager, Branch Chief/Management
Team advisor, officers for automated data processing
ramifications, project officer, and contracting officer
Office Director
provides clear guidance to staff on process to access a
contractor
dedicates staff resources to a "procurement team" tasked
with developing an unambiguous request for proposals and
establishing clear evaluation criteria. OUST's new
procurements will be offered in a full and open competitive
process to solicit proposals from a wide variety of
offerers.
reviews new contract procurements and certifies they have
adequate evaluation criteria and conform to Agency
requirements; OUST works closely with EPA's Procurement and
Contracts Management Division (PCMD) in developing
procurement packages
-------
Issues
OUST's issues focus primarily on a few areas where we would
like to see improvement in some of the services EPA's Procurement
and Contracts Management Division (PCMD) provides to us. In
particular, PCMD should:
work to improve its turnaround time in processing routine
contracts management paperwork: we have experienced
excessively long delays in PCMD's processing of our work
assignments, modifications, work plan approvals, procurement
requests, and requests to exercise options
strive to decrease the high turnover rate in contract
specialists and hire contract specialists with more
experience and familiarity with contracts issues
improve PCMD's training
o training to certify work assignment managers and
project officers needs to be offered more frequently to
accommodate demand, and should provide additional
practical information on responsibilities and duties of
project officers and work assignment managers
strengthen existing outreach efforts and develop more
formaI/routine communications systems from the contracting
specialists/officers to program project officers to ensure
program offices are kept abreast of contract management
issues, such as recertification requirements, changes to
procurement requirements, PCMD's expectations, etc.
Vulnerabilities Already Declared
none
Potential vulnerabilities
a few of OUST's work assignment managers are not certified
o as training is available, these work assignment
managers will participate in the training and obtain
official certification
OUST currently has a video consultant co-located on site two
days per week; however, we have justified her presence to
PCMD, received PCMD's approval for her to be on site, and
-------
have modified the contract appropriately. Additionally, we
have clearly identified her as a consultant to staff.
Major Contracts in Regions
OUST's contracts are managed in Headquarters; however, the
Regions do access our contracts via work assignments. All
controls in Headquarters are applied to Regional work
assignments. In addition, Regional work assignments require
approval of Regional management as well as Headquarters'
management.
o the scope of work in OUST's contracts expressly permits
use of the contracts by the Regions
Plan and Schedule for Comprehensive Review
beginning in April (through the end of June), OUST will
review our four contracts to ensure they are being managed
correctly and appropriately, and to identify potential
vulnerabilities and activities to remedy our deficiencies
o PCMD performed an in-depth "Blue Team" review of our
contracts in January 1991. They verbally debriefed us
on their findings; however, they never developed a
written report. OUST held follow-up meetings with our
contractors to review the findings and identify ways to
improve.
o PCMD performed a follow-up review in January 1992 and
will submit a written report to OUST. OUST will meet
with PCMD to discuss their findings, meet with
contractors to review the findings, and identify
remedial action to improve deficiencies.
Impact of CSC Contract Termination
OUST uses the CSC contract to access ATLIS, a subcontractor
to CSC, who provides us with distribution management
services
o DOPO: Beverly Thomas
o amount of funding: $130,000 for FY92
o time needed for transition: 2 to 4 months if we begin
to use EPIC; up to 1 year if we have to recompete
-------
potential delays in work: need time to set up an
alternate mechanism and transfer inventory from ATLIS
to that mechanism
termination of the CSC contract (and our access to
ATLIS) would severely impact the Regions, States, and
regulated community as there would be no warehousing of
large quantities of publications and no distribution
capability in place to respond to continuing requests
for information
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
APR I 3 ice?
OFFICE OF
SOLIO WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
Subject: Contracts Management Review
<
From: Sylvia K. Lowrance, Director
Office of Solid Waste J*-
To: OSW Division Directors
OSW Deputy Division Directors
OSW Branch Chiefs
OSW Section Chiefs
These past few weeks, several articles/reports have appeared?
in the news media criticizing the management of contracts within }.
EPA. The Administrator and Assistant Administrator for
Administration and Resources Management have both expressed
concerns about the contracts management culture within the
\gency. In this regard, the Administrator has asked all
management within the Agency to assess present and potential
contracts management problems falling within their purview. An
Agency-wide task force also has been established to identify and
address contract management issues within the Agency.
I consider proper contracts management one of our highest
priorities. We have made significant progress in improving
contracts management during the past few years. The recent
criticisms of the Agency in the contracts area only reinforce my
desire to continually improve our own contracts management
functions.
In performing our own internal assessment in response to the
Administrator's request, several potential vulnerabilities were
found, two of which I believe are relatively major. First, I
want you to examine your performance standards and modify them,
as appropriate, to more clearly articulate your responsibilities
in managing and overseeing the contracting process. Attached is
a copy of a generic performance standard I want you to use as
guidance in modifying your own standard. Cheryl Barton is
available to give you advice if you need it. By April 30th, I
would like you to give Cheryl a copy of your standard as it
relates to your particular contract management responsibilities.
A related, but larger concern of mine, relates to the
risibility and attention given to contracts management by OSW
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
management. While we have a Project Officers' work group to
address OSW-wide contract issues, we do not have in every
Division, quality action teams to address contract management
issues/problems unique to each Division. To me, a truly
successful organization needs such a team in place to continually
address contracts issues, particularly an organization like OSW
where we rely heavily on contracts to accomplish our mission.
Therefore, I am asking you to establish a quality action team or
workgroup, if you have not done so already, to address new or
existing contracts management issues or concerns. This team
should consist of Project Officers, their supervisors,
representative WAM's or DO/PO's from each Section and/or Branch,
and one senior manager; i.e., Division Director or Deputy
Division Director.
Finally, each QAT or workgroup in a Division should provide
me by June 30th, a summary of findings and recommendations
associated with the following areas:
1. A review of all contracting activities within your
Division to ensure compliance with EPA ORDER
1900.2 regarding prohibited and sensitive :
contracting activities. j
2. A review of all controls to strengthen sensitive
contracting activities.
3. A review of all accountability mechanisms in place
to ensure that all parties understand their
respective roles/responsibilities in the
accountability process.
4. A review of contracts implementation procedures to
ensure compliance with all OSW standard operating
procedures as outlined in Nuts & BOLTs .
5. The identification of training and information
needs on contracts management in each of your
Divisions.
6. A review of each Division's overall contracting
strategy in light of possible changing program
needs and demands.
We have a lot to be proud of in OSW with respect to
contracts management. This is an area, however, where we can not
rest on our past accomplishments. I am counting on you to follow
through on my requests. We will be better professionals and a
better organization for doing so.
Attachment
cc:
Pfis
-------
Office of Solid Waste
Suggested Performance Standard for OSW Managers
Adjust these as appropriate to your specific
role/responsibilities.
Assumption; Knowledgeable and informed of Government,
Agency and OSW-specific policies and procedures regarding
contracts and their management.
Standard; Provides oversight in the management and
administration of contracts through the following
activities:
o In coordination with Branch and Division program
priorities, establishes and implements annual
contracting strategy for Section and/or
Branch/Division.
o Ensures all staff, as appropriate, performance
standards contain contracts management and contracts
administration performance criteria.
o Ensures that Section/Branch/Division staff are
appropriately trained to manage work assignments,
delivery orders and/or contracts. Provides continuous
opportunities for experienced and new staff within the
Branch/Division to continually update and increase
their knowledge and skills in handling contracts-
related operations and management.
o Carefully reviews work assignment requests to ensure
that work reflects technical scope, schedule and budget
estimates and appropriately fit within
Section/Branch/Division program priorities.
o Routinely reviews work assignment tasking against
obligations, and rate of expenditure of extramural
dollars against obligations.
o Routinely meets with Project Officer to review
financial and tasking status of contracts, and status
of problems and/or issues of concern.
o Ensures an overall balanced approach to meeting
technical as well as administrative requirements of
managing work assignments, delivery orders and/or
contracts within Section/Branch/Division.
-------
-------
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Submissions on Contract Management
From: Elaine Stanley, Deputy Director
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
To: Judy Kertcher, Director
Resources and Information Management, OSWER
Attached please find information in response to your March
17 memo on contracts management. I have organized the so-called
March 24 submissions by the seven bullets of your attachment 1
but have some comments to add on each of the bulleted response.
Attachment 2, Part l: List of all contracts, etc. The disk
is available if you would like it.
Part 2: Summary of existing internal controls for contracts
managemenr. In addition to the controls shown in the attachment
which are drawn from our FMFIA plan, OWPE also has some
significant institutional controls on the use of contractors
stemming from our role as an enforcement organization.
Additional steps that we have taken include:
-Stringent hiring criteria for people managing contract
activities.
- Adherence to and exceedance of Agency guidelines for
training. All designated WAMs have attende the contract
administration course and OWPE has held our own WAM training
sessions over the last two years to provide additional guidance.
especially on conflict of interest, to staff and managers.
-Measures that stress good contract management and control
are required elements of performance agreements for all project
officers, work assignment managers and their supervisors.
-Emphasis on constant review of proposed work assignments
against the the 1991 EPA order on contracting.
- An OWPE-specif ic form on organizational conflict of
interest/vulnerability assessment to be used by managers and WAMs
to identify potential problem areas and to resolve them.
(Memo attached)
- An oft-stated disinclination on the part of the Office
Director and Deputy Office Director to the use of contractors
that has minimized this office's reliance on them and vigilance
in managing then.
Part 3: Identify any vulnerabilities. OWPE has not declared
any vulnerabilities office-wide in the area of contracting.
Part 4: Identify potential vulnerabilities. (1) OWPE is
-------
taking another close look at the day-to-day use of contractors
with particular attention to participation in meetings. Plans
were to include contractors at meetings discussing the corrective
action plan guidance and on the RIP. OWPE will take extra time
before the meetings to outline roles for the contractors who will
be present and then after the meetings to give direction as to
written products required. All this will be documented. (2)
OWPE continues to be concerned about regional use of contractors
in certain enforcement support activities. I attach an earlier
memo on this subject. (3) A third potential area is contracts
management and staff turnover. Although turnover has slowed
down, it is important to remain vigilant to the needs of new
WAMs, managers and employees in general for training and
refreshers on conflict of interest and good contracts management
practices.
Parts 5 and 6: Overseeing major regional contracts. The
attachment from Walt DeRieux explains some of the day-to=day
activities that the Zone Project Officers. These measures are
also exercised for the RCRA part of the regional TES contracts.
Part 7: Potential impact of termination of TOSS. OWPE has
two current delivery orders under the TOSS contract. One of the
delivery orders are for CERCLIS-related work, for enforcement-
related modifications to the software and for SETS operations and
enhancements. The other is for the daily operations of the
TESWATS system, a computer-based tracking systems that assists
POs and COs in preparing, processing and managing TES work
assignments. This delivery order requires 3 onsite contractors
who are located at the Fairchild building near PCMD. In addition
to these two delivery orders, OWPE also puts funds in two
national delivery orders under the TOSS which provide for
regional data entry and ADP services; the DOPOs for these are in
OSW and OERR. Termination of the CSC contract would
substanitally impact the enforcement information management
needs. All work currently being done would have to be
transitioned to another contractor. Our experience has shown
that a new contractor coming up to speed can take as much as 6
months after coming on board.
In addition to this current use of CSC, OWPE had a delivery
order with CSC to do work for the cost recovery program. That
order was terminated due to CSC's poor performance; it was also
one of the ones looked at by the IG. I attach our response to
the IG's report for your reference. Finally, OWPE had proposed
recently to initiate a delivery order with CSC to provide support
for the export-import notifications database but we have decided
not to pursue this further.
cc: Rich Guimond
-------
Attachment I, Part 1
List of Contracts that OWPE Participates in
Popular
Name of Contract
Headquarters TES
RCRA Implementation
TOSS
Regional TES
Contracts
TES V
TES VI
Contractor
DPRA
A.T. Kearney
CSC
Booz, Allen & Hamilton OARM
Cadmus Water Enf
COM
Alliance Technologies
Placement
Office
OWPE
OSW
OARM
Project
Officer
Marlene Lemro
Alan Pearce
William Cherry
OWPE
WAM
List Attached
Jack Jojokian
Rose Harvell
Chris Nugent
Vicki Bailey Luis Troche
Ron Coleman Frank Biros
Mary Grealish, Reg 1
Cathy Moyik, Reg 2
TES VII
TES VIII
TES IX
TEX X
TES XI
TES XII
COM
Dynamac
PRC
Metcalf and Eddy
SAIC
PRC
Donna McGowan, Reg 3
Ken Meyers, Reg 4
Eva Howard, Reg 5
Gail Nabasny, Reg 5
Karen Hartis, Reg 6
Maureen Hunt, Reg 7
Sam Marquez, Reg 8
Judy Walker, Reg 9
Peter Rubenstein, Reg 10
-------
Popular
Name of Contract
RCRA HQs TES
Wic
Contractor
Booz, Allen & Hamilton OWPE
RCRA Implementation PRC
Pollution Prevention Battelle
Unisys
Placement
Office
OSW
ORD
NDPD
Booz, Allen & Hamilton OERR
Proj ect
Officer
OWPE
WAM
Billie Perry List Attached
Linda Kertcher
Allen Perce
John Buckle
Ted Harris
OARM
Billie Perry
Karin Leff
Davis Jones
Phyllis Donohue
Oarlene
Williams
Gwen Wilder
-------
Headquarters TES
Principal Work Assignment Managers
Marlene Lemro
Jim Woolford
Walt De Rieux
Amy Legare
Luis Troche
Rose Harvell
Frank Biros
Scott Blair
Renee Wynn
Ben Hamm
Chris Nugent
Sven Eric Kaiser (OSWER)
Fred Seitz
Karen Hartis
Arthene Pugh (OE)
Jane Stieber (OSW)
Bruce Pumphrey
Cindy Byron
Chad Littleton
Billie Perry
RCRA Headquarters TES
Work Assignment Managers
Linda Kutsher
Ellen Epstein
Bob Small
Melissa Ward
Jim Thompson
John Dombrowski
Tracy Back
Billie Perry
Jeff Kelly
Darlene Williams
Rose Lew
Ellen Kandell
Mickey Post
Barry Korb
Rick Colbert
Kate Anderson
Shelly Fudge
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
AUG I 0 1990
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: OWPE Directive - Contracting, in OWPE
FROM: /T^ruce M. Diamond,
•7 Office of Waste Programs Enforcement \
TO: OWPE Staff
In recent months considerable attention has been paid to EPA's
use of contractors. A number of initiatives are being implemented
to assure compliance with applicable laws and regulations and avoid
an appearance that contractors are not being used for legitimate
reasons.
To accomplish these goals I am requiring the following
procedures for all work assignment managers.
1. All work assignment managers must complete both the three-day
contract administration course offered by PCMD and the OWPE
seminar.
2. All project officers, work assignment managers and their
supervisors will have a measure in their FY91 performance agreement
that stresses good contract management and control. Draft language
from Chapter 1 of the Contracts Management Manual appears as
Attachment A.
3. Before submitting a work assignment form, each work assignment
manager must read EPA Order - Contracting at EPA (The draft order
is Attachment B) to understand the difference between prohibited
activities and vulnerable activities. There are 17 prohibited
activities for which there are no exceptions and 15 vulnerable
activities for which a justification must be written to explain why
the work cannot be performed internally and to ensure that the
final product is unbiased and represents Agency thinking;.
4. For each new or revised work assignment for an OWPE contract
an Organisational Conflict of Interest/Vulnerability Assessment
must be completed (Attachment C) and attached to the work
assignment form. The purpose of this form is for the work
assignment manager to identify potential problem areas and to
specify ways of dealing with them. Although it is the
-------
-------
Attac.-.me.-.t A
-Position 3escnc:
rreoires the crccurerr.er. t recuest raticr.ale cccu.~e.~t i.~
a ^^-.-s W 1 t.~. t.~.e Contracts M s.~.£r 5.T.S ~. - /'=."_£' "Cr 3-C.7' =r' ".
crccure.-er.t request, tr.e Statement cf WcrX, tr.e esc-.-iti::
cudget, tr.e ;ustificaticn fcr other than full ar.c ccer.
c c rr.c et^zicr. 'if r.ecessar*''}/ t.~. e evaluation criteria » i f
necessarv';, tne justification fcr providing governr.ent property
to a contractor (if necessary), the delivery schedule, period
of performance, and reporting schedule.
2. Performs the technical evaluation cf proposals in accordance
with tne Agency's source evaluation and selection procedures.
This includes the initial evaluation cf technical proposals,
tne evaluation of best and final offers, and the evaluation
of cost proposals to determine cost realism. For procurements
over 50Ck, recommends the selection cf individuals on a tecnnical
evaluation panel for the evaluation of proposals in accordance
witn tne procedures in £?A Acquisition Regulation (SPAAA).
Serves as chairperson over the activities-of those selected or.
the technical evaluation panel.
3. Monitors the cost, management, and overall technical
performance of the contract after award. Reviews and reconnnends
approval or disapproval of work assignments which are generated
under the contract to ensure that the work is within the scope
of the contract. Ensures that the key personnel clause is
adhered to by the contractor throughout the period of
performance (where applicable). Ensures that the appropriate
appropriation/accounting data is present on the original worx
assignment so that the finance office can properly disburse
funds. Ensures that proper procedures are followed and
clearances are obtained for the use of any additional consultants
and/or subcontracts which may be needed to perform work on the
contract. Notifies the Contracting Officer of any potential or
actual conflicts of interest occurring within the activity of
the contract. ., Reviews and recommends approval of vouchers for
payment. Ensures that the Agency's multiple appropriation
policy is properly adhered to. Issues technical direction to
the Contractor where permitted by the contract. Inspects and
recommends acceptance or nonacceptance of contract deliverables,
including the preparation of comments on any -draft submittals.
Notifies the Contracting Officer of any failure by the Contractor
to meet delivery dates or any other terms and conditions of; tne
contract. Also notifies the Contracting Officer when the
Statement of Work or contract terms and conditions need to be
modified.
A-l
-------
-------
sue cert - -- - ar.c ccer. competition.
a.r.z in ad ecu a te ly detailsc -err.r.ical evaluations wr. icr. a:
ir. ccr.i~rTr.ar.ce wi-.- tr.e .-.cer.cy's source evaluation ir.z
selectier. procedures. Technical evaluations ar.c source
selecticr1. res cc ~s ic ili t i. s s are ~cc cericrr.ec w.tr. i.~. ".*•=
cresericec ceaclir.e estaelisr.ed by tr.s supervisor.
zecr.r.i.eal eireeeier. fer cer.traeeer eereerrr.ar.ce wr.ier. v.ll
er.sure ..-.e C-cverr.-e-- receives er.e crce-ccs er services
purer, as ee.
Cu~s ear.dir.c : E5"aclisr.es . reliaele ~ar.acer.er. t reecrcs ar.d
ce.^r.ur.icaeicr. r.ecworxs whicr. can forecast witr. 95^ accuracy
(or "ore) er.e wcrx or eos e status of tr.e contract upcr.
request of tr.e supervisor or Contracting Officer. Always
initiates prccer actions to control costs, ensures that an
appropriate laocr mix xs maintained (where applicable),
wcrx is performed within the scope of the contract, advance
clearances are ootained for additional subcontractors and
consultants, that tr.e xey personnel clause in the contract
is strictly adhered to, and reasonaole deadlines are always
met by th.e contractor. Always ensures that the Agency's
multiple appropriations policy' is strictly followed. Always
informs the supervisor and Contracting Officer_of potential
conflicts of interest or actual conflict- of interest in
the contract as soon as the faces are discovered. Always
notifies the supervisor and Contracting Officer of any
failure or violation of the teems and conditions established
in the contract. Always assists in the timely close cut of
che completed contract by providing the proper close out
information to the Contracting Office within one week of
request for such information. Always provides precise,
timely, and appropriate information to the Contracting
Officer which assists in appeal actions, protests, or any
default actions taken by the Contracting Officer (where
applicaole) . •
Fully Successful: Establishes management records and
communication networks which can forecast with 90% accuracy
(or more) the work or cost status of the contract upon
request of the supervisor or Contracting Officer. Initiates
proper actions to control costs, ensures that an appropriate
labor mix is maintained (where applicable), work is performed
within the scope of the contract with few (if any) objections
registered by the Contracting Officer, ensures- that
advance clearances are obtained for additional subcontractors
and consultants, that the key personnel clause in the contrao'
is strictly adhered to, and ensures that reasonable deadlines
are met by the contractor. Ensures that the Agency's
multiple appropriations policy is strictly followed.
Informs the supervisor and Contracting Officer of potential
conflicts or actual conflicts of ' »rest in the contract
within one day after the facts are discovered. Notifies
A-3
-------
-------
Attachment 3
-Position rescripticn-
Ccr.^racts X"cr;< Ass ,;r.:r.er. t Manager
c: wcr:< frr tr.e wcr:< ass :—_T.er.t is wi-:-.i- t.-.e general sc:;e
cf -'cr<- for tr.e overall contract. C-tai.-.s the prcper iur.di.-.g
commitments to fund t.-.e work assignee.".' (if necessary!. 3evelcps
tne government' s work estimate identifying the level of effort
required to complete tr.e work assignment as necessary. 3eter?.i.-.es
tr.e appropriate appropriation/accounting data applicable to the
work assignment to aid the Finance Office in properly discursing
funds. Ensures that the Agency's policy on tr.e use of multiple
appropriations is complied with. Calculates the numoer of work
years needed, the proper labor mix, the project schedule and/or
milestones, reporting requirements/ travel, any government
property or equipment, and any other information which the
Contracting Officer or contractor properly needs to understand
the work requirement being issued.
2. Reviews and recommends approval/disapproval of the work plans
issued by the contractor describing the approach necessary to
implement the tasks in the work assignment. Recommends approval
/disapproval of any aspect of the proposed work assignment budget
except for the costs already established by the contract (fringe,
overhead rates/ G&A, and fee). Ensures 'that any consultants or
subcontractors identified in the work plan have been properly
authorized by the Contracting Officer to perform work on the
contract.
3. Monitors and oversees the performance of the work assignment.
Provides the necessary government technical direction to the
contractor. Reviews all vouchers submitted by the contractor for
payment against the appropriate work assignment and recommends
approval or disapproval through the Project Officer. Reviews all
progress reports submitted by the contractor on the work assignment
in order to properly monitor and control costs as well as ensure
contractor performance and use of proposed personnel. Identifies
and reports any subcontractor, cost, performance, or conflict of
interest problems to the Project Officer. Reviews and recommends
approval or disapproval of all deliverable products submitted by
the contractor under the work assignment. Submits a final report
to 'the Project Officer on overall contractor performance, a
summary of costs'incurred, and a summary of the tasks performed.
B-l
-------
-------
supervisor. .-rccer acccuntir.g/apprcpr lat icr. :ata :s _s_ally
net identified nor sufficient funds secured to fund tr.e
requirement, "ails to ensure that the Agency's policy c-.
multiple ar prcpriaticr.s is strictly complied w.t'n ens cr ^.cre
tir.es. Calculates (with less tnan 5G% accuracy1 government
estimates w n i c n identify t r. e c r c c e r 1 a c c r r. i :< needed ~,~
to ce transferred :r obtained, and anv ether, rests i.-.vclvei
Objective * i: -0 provide tecnnica. monitoring over contractor
cerfcrmar.ee which will ensure that the government receives
the products or services purchased in the work requirement.
Cuts t and i.-.g : Always maintains reliaole management reccr.s in
order to accurately access the wcr< or cost status ef the
wcr< assignment (with 95% accuracy or more; upon request cf
the supervisor or Project Officer. Always initiates proper
actions to control costs, to ensure contractor performance,
to meet established milestones, to obtain advance clearances
for subcontractors and consultants, to ensure proper utilization
of contractor personnel, and to ensure that work performed is
within tne scope of the contract. Always identifies and
reports any performance or conflict of interest problems to
the supervisor and Project Officer. Always accurately
evaluates contractor products/deliverables without any errors.
Submits a final report to the supervisor and Project Officer
within one week of project completion identifying overall
V contractor performance, a summary of cos.ts incurred, and a
summary of the tasks performed.
Fully Successful: Maintains adequate management records in
order- to reasonably determine the work or cost status of the
work assignment (with 90% accuracy or more) upon request of
the supervisor or Project Officer. Takes proper actions to
control costs, to ensure contractor performance, to meet
estaoiished milestones, to obtain clearances for subcontractors
or consultants, and to ensure proper utilization of contractor
personnel, and to ensure that work performed is within the
scope of the contract. Promptly reports any cost, performance,
or conflict of interest problems to the supervisor and Project
Officer. Evaluates" contractor products/deliverables with few
(if any) errors. Submits a final report to the supervisor and
Project Officer within two weeks of project completion identi-
fying overall contractor performance, a summary of costs- ..
incurred, and a summary of tasks performed.
Unsatisfactory: Usually does not maintain adequate management
records and cannot reasonably determine the work or cost
status of the work assignment (.with 90% accuracy) upon request
of the supervisor or Project Officer. Fails to take proper
action one or more times to control costs, to ensure contractor
3-3
-------
-------
DRAFT
ATTACHMENT B
CONTRACTING AT F?
-';~?C5i. This Order establishes Agency policy regarding t.-.e
a~ctir.g~for certain sensitive services at EPA."
EPA relies r.aavilv en
Nearlv every _?A employee is ir.vcivec. vicn t.~e ccr.'racz.r.r
ccr.-uni.ty in one way or another. Thus, in a very real ser.se,
most EPA employees, including senior management, can ce
considered contract managers.
Agency responsibility and accountability begin when a
decision is made to use contract support. And, having accepted a
final product fron a contractor, EPA becomes responsible for its
content and for how it may be used in reaching Agency decisions.
The extent of the Agency's contracting coupled with its
regulatory nature, create a strong potential for conflict of
interest with members of the contracting community. This problem
is magnified when a limited number of contractors provide support
in a variety of potentially sensitive areas. EPA must consider
these facts when developing its contract requirements. It must,
be judicious in deciding the most effective ways to use its
contractors and look for ways of reducing the potential for
conflicts of interest. And, once a contract is awarded, EPA must
play a proactive role in ensuring a final product that is
unbiased and represents Agency thinking. The final product
provided under a contract may assist EPA in reaching a decision;
however, a contractor should not make the decision for the
Agency.
OMB Circular A-76 defines inherently governmental activities
as those "being so intimately related to the public interest as
to mandate performance only by Federal employees." To protect
EPA's credibility, Agency employees must ensure that inherently
governmental activities are performed only by EPA employees.
NOTE: For purposes of this Order, "active contract
managers" are defined as Project Officers, Deputy Project
Officers^Work Assignment Managers, Remedial Project
Officers, On-Scene Coordinators, and Delivery Order
Officers. "EPA managers" consist of senior management not
directly involved in contract management. . .
3. POLICY. . '
a. EPA will not allow any of the following to be performed
under its contracts:
(1) The actual preparation of Congressional testimony.
Although it is permissible for a contractor to
perform basic research and retrieve factual data for
the Agency in its development of Congressional
-------
-------
DRAFT
ensure the reliability of any assumptions, options,
opinions, or recommendations the contractor -ay have
made. In all cases, there should be a clear record
that the contractor's work was carefully reviewed and
that -final decisions were made by Agency personnel.
The appearance of "rubber-stamping" seriously
_r. is r~ir.es cue lie trust.
(5) Participating as a voting member on a Perfcrr.ar.ce
Evaluation Board; participating in and/or attending Award Fee
meetings.
The assignment of an evaluation score and the
making of recommendations of prof it/fee payments by cr.e
contractor for another are clearly conflicts of
interest. All functions relating to the decisions of
award fees are inherently governmental and should be
performed exclusively by Agency staff. However,
contractors may provide specialized technical expertise
as input to the Board prior to the actual evaluation
meeting discussions. The key determining factor is the
nature of the support; in all cases, it should be non-
judgmental, i.e. free from opinions regarding the
quality of a contractor's performance. For
confidentiality reasons, no contractor may be present
during the Board meeting. Any opinions expressed as
the result of a Performance Evaluation Board should be
those of the Government. Additionally, due to the
subjective and confidential nature of the Board
reports, their typing should remain an in-house
function.
(6) Preparing Award Fee letters, even under typing
services contracts.
Because Award Fee letters contain significantly
sensitive and confidential information that could
possibly have a detrimental effect on a firm's
reputation, it is inappropriate to allow outside
entities, even those contractors performing typing
serv^es, access to such information.
(7) The actual preparation of Award Fee Plans.
This is an inherently governmental function that
details th« discretionary and judgmental decisions
behind the process the Government will be using in its
evaluation of a contractor's performance. It would be
inappropriate for any contractor to advise the Agency
on what should be important to it. Provided that all
-------
-------
DRAFT
issuance forms. This prohibition does not restrict
contractors from preparing work plans which are, in
fact, their own responsibility.
(11) " On behalf of EPA, actually preparing responses
rerrrts frcn the Inspector General, General Accounting
> cr ether auditing entities
and
(12) On behalf of EPA, preparing responses to
Congressional correspondence.
Both of these items are analogous to the situation
discussed under Item (1), above. Although it is
permissible for contractors to perform in a research cr
fact-finding capacity, the final document should be
produced by EPA personnel to ensure that it is free
from outside bias and that it truly represents Agency
thinking.
(13) The actual preparation of responses to Freedom of
Information Act requests, other than routine, non-judgmental
correspondence — in all cases, EPA must sign it.
The key word here is "non-judgmental," being
synonymous with "non-decisional." We do not want
contractors to decide what is releasable under FOIA
since that is an inherently governmental function
involving the interpretation of statutes and Agency
regulations. Recognizing that some FOIA work is non-
judgmental or non-decisional, it is permissible for
contractors to be used in those areas. For example,
provided all Agency regulations regarding the release
of confidential business information (CBI) and Privacy
Act information previously have been followed,
contractors may be used to collect data for the Agency
as long as they are not deciding what data is
releasable. Similarly, if CBI and Privacy Act
regulations have been addressed, contractors may be
used"*to redact documents provided that decisions on
what to redact are made exclusively by Agency
personnel. Questions concerning interpretation of CBI
and Privacy Act regulations should be referred to the
Office of General Counsel.
(14) Any contract which authorizes a contractor to
represent itself as EPA to outside parties.
No contract may contain such an authorization.
There may be times when contractors are assumed to be
EPA personnel; in order to gain the public's trust and
-------
-------
DRAFT
This justification must be signed by the cognizant Assista.-.t
Administrator, Associate-Administrator, or Regional Administrator
if the reo^iest will result in the award of a new contract. For
purchases less _than S25,000, the justification must be signed by
a crcrrar. official at least one level above the initiating
office. If tr.e request is for a particular work assignr.er.t cr
task order under a contract, the justification must be signed :r.e
level _above the Project Officer. The following are contract wcr.-:
areas necessitating this justification:
(1) Budget preparation support including but not
limited to workload modeling, fact-finding, efficiency studies,
and should-cost analyses,
(2) Reorganization and planning support,
(3) Support services such as analyses, feasibility
studies, etc. to be used by EPA personnel in developing policy,
(4) Regulation development support,
(5) Any support in the in-house evaluation of another
contractor's performance,
(6) Involvement in strategic acquisition planning,
(7) Support on improving contract management,
(8) Providing specialized expertise in the contractor
selection process,
(9) Situations where contractors share office space
with EPA employees,
(10) Providing specialized expertise in the
development of Statements of Work, Work Assignments, other
contract-ordered tasks,
(11) Support in preparing responses to Freedom of
Information Acfc -requests,
(12) Any situation where a contractor has access to
Confidential Business Information and/or any other sensitive
information,
(13) Any support involving EPA policy or regulatory
interpretation, such as manning hotlines, attending conferences
on behalf of EPA, community relations efforts, conducting EPA
training courses, etc.,
-------
-------
DRAFT
(d) The requirement to include in all EPA
managers' performance standards language emphasizing strong
contract management and control
;' 4 ') Revising the current contract -ar.ager.ent tnir. :.-.r
classes to ir.clude discussions of this Order.
(5) Instituting a one-day contract management
refresher course to be taken every three years by active contract
managers in order to maintain their certification.
b. EPA offices employing contract support are responsible
for the following:
(1) Considering ways to break up requirements for the
procurement of sensitive services into smaller components,
thereby reducing the potential for conflicts of interest.
(2) Along with the performance standard requirements
for active contract managers discussed within the CMM, including
in all other EPA managers' performance standards language, as
included within the'CMM, emphasizing strong contract management
and control.
(3) In accordance with guidance established in the
CMM, requiring active contract managers to attend the contract
management refresher course once every three years, in order to
maintain their certified status.
c. All Agency employees are responsible for the following:
(1) Being aware of the content of this Order and
bringing any suspected violations to the attention of the
cognizant Contracting Officer.
(2) Ensuring that the "prohibited" activities listed
in Paragraph 3.a. and the "sensitive" activities listed in
Paragraph 3.b. are handled in accordance with the guidance
outlined in this Order and the CMM.
William K. -.Reilly
-------
-------
To the best of your knowledge, does the contractor perform
work on this subject
-------
-------
11. No potential conflict of interest or vulnerability is known
or if identified, I believe that all reasonable, necessary
mitigative and control measures will be taken during the
implementation of the work assignment; therefore, I
recommend approval:
Yes No
Project Officer Date
12. This assessment must be reviewed and concurred on by the
' division director or staff office director of the work
assignment manager if Item 9 b) is answered "yes". I
believe that all reasonable, necessary mitigative and
control measures will be taken during the implementation of
the work assignment; therefore, I recommend approval:
Yes No
Division/Office Director Date
-------
-------
1, ^^ t
SUMMARY OF EXISTING INTERNAL CONTROLS
FOR CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT
CERCLA and R<:RA Enforcement Division's FMFIA Event Cycle
Documentation essentially contain the same language for Contract
Administration and Management. PMSO's role in contract
administration is limited to Work Assignment Managers accessing
various contract vehicles (TES XIII, TOSS, etc.).
Each Division has four major control objectives:
1) Ensure designated staff have adequate experience/training
(Contract Administration course and periodic WAM workshops).
2) Ensure expenditures don't exceed authorized funding and
ceilings and ensure ceilings for labor categories, labor
hours, and consultants provided in contract aren't exceeded
(various monthly tracking systems).
3) Ensure work is performed in accordance with contract/delivery
order/work assignment (maintain and review files, reports,
work plans and meetings with the contractor).
4) a) Monitor contract payments to:
1) ensure timely and accurate payments to contractor
2) ensure proper expenditures by site-specific account number
3) ensure payment is made for work completed in satisfactory
manner according to contract specifications.
b) Monitor contractor closeouts to:
1) ensure work assignment closeout and de-tasking of remaining
funds
2) ensure timely and accurate payout to contractor and de-
obligation of remaining funds.
These objectives are achieved through certifying quality of
performance and completion of tasks, invoices, final payments,
and detasking funds.
-------
-------
- 7 -
necessitated for the following reasons:
1. CSC chronically failed to respond to the DOPO's phone
calls and written letters and other communications. The DOPO
advised your staff that he specifically requested a change in the
CSC contact due to the unwillingness of the original contact
person, Mr. Massman, to respond to DOPO calls and communications.
Mr. Massman's replacement, Mr. Proctor, initially showed a
willingness to become more involved, but still failed to respond
to letters and other communications from the DOPO.
Given the lack of response from CSC and the previously
described importance placed on the output of the Revenue
Projections Model, the only course the DOPO could follow to
fulfill program requirements was direct contact with the
subcontractor. As indicated previously, complaints to the OIRM
PO or the PCMD CO were unsuccessful.
2. NMI had greater technical familiarity with the project
due to its prior involvement in the Model's development and
maintenance. Given the previously described demands on the DOPO
and the informational requests related to the Model's output,
direct contact with the subcontractor was the most efficient path
to achieve the required ends.
Whenever NMI was contacted directly by the DOPO, CSC was
informed after the fact.
d. There was difficulty in evaluating CSC invoices.
As the DOPO pointed out several times in the audit, there
were large time lags between the time period that work was
performed, the time costs were billed and the time in which
invoices were received. This is not unique to the TOSS contract.
The CO is typically the medium for facilitating greater
synchronization of these documents and insuring that monthly
progress reports, billings, and invoices properly mesh. As
mentioned on several occasions this level of coordination was not
achieved with PCMD nor RTP in this case.
As mentioned-, previously, despite large time lags between the
date that work was performed, the date that contractor progress
reports were received and the date that invoices were received
(often after the required approval date) , the DOPO made .every
effort to match up the documents and evaluate performance, prior
to signing the invoices. There were a few instances where CSC
had not completed work reported in their monthly progress report
or performed it unsatisfactorily. In these cases, the DOPO
delayed payment until the work was completed correctly or
withheld payment altogether.
'.\'e would recommend that OIRM adopt an approach like the or.-:
-------
- 8 -
we use in managing our TES contracts, where contract specialists
provide a high level of support to work assignment managers on
request.
As discussed in this memo, the problems described—in the
position paper were the result of inadequate communication and
coordination among the contractor, the OIRM. project officer and
the DOPO. Recognizing that the Division has continuing delivery
orders under the TOSS contract, we will work aggressively to
improve communications among the contractors, TOSS project
officers, and our DOPOs to ensure that current delivery orders
are effectively managed. This Division is committed to effective
management of contract programs in support of Superfund
enforcement.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to respond to the
position paper and hope that you will consider my remarks as you
proceed with your audit report.
cc: Charlene Dunn
Patrick Gilbride
Frank Biros
Fred Seitz
-------
CHPP CONTRACT ACTIVITIES
March 24, 1<>92
I. List of contracts in which CEPP participates
Office Contractor Title
1. CEPP ICF, Inc. Analytical & Tech. Asst
2. OSW
3. ERD
4. ERD
5. ERD
6. ERD
7. OTS
8. OUST
9. OIRM
10. OARM
11. OARM
12. OSW
13. OWPE
14. OARM
Project Officer
Charlotte Englert
Booz-Allen
Western
Ecology & Envt
Research Appli
Research Appli
ICF, Inc.
Nancy Lowe
UNISYS
EG&G Dynat.
DDD Public.
LAI
Booz-Allen
AMS
SF/RCRA/OUST/T-3 Hotline
Technical Asst Team (Zone 1)
Technical Asst Team (Zone 2)
Technical Asst Team 8A (Z 1)
Technical Asst Team 8A (Z-2)
Tech. & Analytical Support
Communications & Mktg Spt.
Inf. Mgmt & Support
Security Support Serves
Public. Storage & Distrib.
Information Mgmt
TES III
Information Mgmt
Barbara Roth
Pat Hawkins
Karen Tomimatsu
Greg Wiegel
Jennifer Maloney
Paul Tobin
D. Rutherford
Don Fulford
Phyllis McLarney
Earl Eastwood
Carlos Lagos
Rick Colbert
Donald Wright
WAM/DOPO
Tony Jover
Lea Anne Gleason
Ken Stroech
Kathy Jones
V. Rodriguez
Mary Greene
John Ferris
Coriolana Simon
John Gustafson
Sherry Fielding
Dorothy McManus
Lyse Helsing
Kathy Bishop
David Chung
Craig Matthiessen
Kim Jennings
Mike Shannon
Technical Monitor
C. Simon
Tony Jover
D. McManus
Kelly Baxter
Kelly Baxter
Kelly Baxter
Kelly Baxter
}. Gustafson
Ken Stroech
D. McManus
Tony Jover
Rick Colbert (OWPE) John Ferris
Kathy Jones
-------
Office Contractor Title Project Officer WAM/DOPQ Technical Monitor
15. OARM CSC Information Mgmt. Brcnda Dailcy Tonyjovcr
16. OIRM Vigyan Information Mgmt. Tom DeWald Tonyjover
17. ORD TR1 ORD Support Al Galli D McManus/KJones
18. OSW ICF, Inc. Mgmt&lnfSupt Doug Ruby C Englert/T. Titus
19. OCEM Delta NACEPT/EMCAPSupt David Graham Coriolana Simon
II. Summary of existing internal controls for contracts management
CEPP manages one level-of-effort contract with ICF, Inc. Management controls currently in place include the following:
- All work assignment managers are trained and certified as officials "WAMs"
- Periodic meetings are held with:
o CEPP managers and staff to discuss administration and implementation issues
o CEPP division director, project officer and contract officer to discuss contract status, problems, emerging issues
o CEPP senior managers, project officer and contractor, as needed
- Work assignment managers must review monthly technical progress reports and resolve disputed issues
prior to invoice approval by project officer
- Project officer receives and reviews monthly contract/work assignment cost summary report to ensure charges are consistent with
projected estimates and activities. Overall contract utilization and hourly rate are also reviewed and reported regularly to
senior management.
- All contract funding documents require approval by two CEPP senior managers.
- Maintain up-to-date recordkeeping system that reflects all contract modifications, contract funding documents, invoice payments,
current work assignments/monthly progress reports, contract correspondence.
III. Identify vulnerabilities declared under FMFIA or identified & addressed as a result of a GAO/OIG review
There are currently no contract vulnerabilities declared under FMFIA, or identified through a GAO/OIG review.
IV. Identify potential vulnerabilities and how you plan to address them (note for each contract involved)
- CEPP utilizes two contracts (EG&G Dynatrend for national security emergency preparedness support and UNISYS for PC support) that
require contract employees to be located on EPA premises. The program will take steps to reassess the need to have these employees on site
and will ensure all necessary management controls for co-location are in place, as required.
-------
-3-
- CEPP has in place approximately twenty-five work assignments under our level-of-effort technical and analytical support contract. To
ensure these work assignments are specifically written to prevent personal service acitivities from being performed, the office will
establish a workgroup of senior specialists from each division to review all statements of work under the contract.
V. Briefly describe how you oversee major contracts in the Regions. Identify any existing or potential vulnerabilities, and how they will be
addressed.
- Regions are provided limited access to CEPP's technical and analytical, level-of-effort contract through one work assignment managed by
a headquarters staff person. Procedures for acquiring access and controls in place for monitoring regional activities follows:
Procedures and Monitoring Controls
o Region prepares outline of proposed project (including estimated number of hours to complete work)
o Headquarters and Region discuss project via telephone to clarify issues
o Once preliminary approval is given by HQs, region works with regional contract office to develop workplan
o Regional staff work directly with contractor field staff to carry out project activities
o Receive monthly reports of activities conducted under each project
o EPA and contractor headquarters with work with regional offices to resolve issues
o HQ WAM maintains regular contact with regional office to monitor progress
- CEPP staff in the Regions utilize the Emergency Response Division's Technical Assistance Team contracts. Procedures for utilizing the
contract and controls in place for monitoring the work follows:
Procedures and Monitoring Controls
o CEPP Regional staff use the Emergency Response Division's (ERD) Technical Assistance Team (TAT) contracts to support
CEPP's CERCLA activities. CEPP Regional staff works through ERD's DPOs to order contract services by issuing a Technical
Directive Document (TDD). Only POs and DPOs are authorized to approve TDDs.
o Exceptional requests or requests for large numbers of contract hours are brought to the attention of CEPP HQ staff for comment. A
verbal or written recommendation is given to the PO of the contract.
o Monthly activity reports are reviewed by CEPP HQ staff to ensure proper use of previous month's contract hours.
o CEPP staff attend EPA DPO/TAT annual conference and other meetings to ensure CEPPO program goals are understood and
incorporated into the goals of the ERD TAT contract.
-------
-4-
VI. Provide your plans and a schedule for conducting a comprehensive review of all contracts and internal controls under your purview
- CEPP will establish a workgroup with representatives from each division to review all work assignments and management activities
under the office s level-of-effort contract, as well as other contracts utilized by the office. Within 90 days, the work group will make
recommendations as needed to ensure sufficient controls are in place and contract activities properly managed.
- CEPP is establishing an upward mobility position to provide assistance in managing contract activites; i.e., preparing guidance for work
assignment managers, monitoring day-to-day contract activities and providing management assistance to project officer.
VII As appropriate, please provide information on the potential impact of termination of the CSC contract (amount of funding; time
needed for transition; potential delays in work; etc.) Provide information on Regional needs of which you are aware.
A , W°rk assiKnment "** CSC in the amount of $60,000. This work involves support for maintaining a data base for the
Accidental Release Information Program and maintaining a directory of Local Emergency Planning Committees. The potential impact of
termmatmg the ICF contract would be negligible since other sources are available to support these tasks.
VIII. In addition, CEPP will implement the following:
- Establish quarterly meetings with senior managers and the Office Director to discuss management issues, problem areas and priorities.
- Develop a training session for CEPP work assignment managers utilizing expertise of OSW contracts management ombudsman.
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
MAR 231992
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: March 24 Submission on
Contract Management
FROM: Asa R. Frost, Jr., Director/
Information Management (IM)
TO: Judith A. Kertcher, Director
Resources & Information Management
In response to your memo of March 17 requesting a March 24
submission on contract management, I submit the following:
The first item in attachment 1; of your March 17 memo, ask
for a list of all contracts IM participate in; the name of the PO,
DOPO(s) and WAMs for each.
CONTRACT i
68-W9-0039
68-C8-0062
68-W1-0055
68-WO-0043
68-WO-0053
68-C9-0009
68-W9-0052
68-WO-0005
CQ-815281
CONTRACTOR
AMS
AMS
AMS
AMS
AMS
SAIC
SAIC
SAIC
CSC
CSC
COM
CADMUS
LAI
IBM
NCBA
PO
D. Wright
D. Wright
D. Wright
D. Wright
D. Wright
R. O'Herron
R. O'Herron
V. Coffey
B. Daly
B. Daly
D.Greathouse
R. Coleman
L. Garrison
T. Harris
P. Powers
DOPO/WAM
C. Carpenter
M. Melley
C. Carpenter
E. Jenkins
E. Jenkins
C. Carpenter
M. Hall
M. Hall
M. Melley
K. Barton
M. Melley
C. Carpenter
E. Jenkins
E. Jenkins
R. Carter
ATTACHMENT 1; ITEM 2 - Summary of existing internal controls for
contracts management.
Pwifed on Recycled Paper
-------
IM has several existing internal controls for contracts management.
All of IM Project Officers, Delivery Order Officers and Work
Assignment Managers have Contract Management criteria and duties
included in their performance standards. I also receive monthly
project reports from all of IM Project Officers, Delivery Order
Officers and Work Assignment Managers. These reports include
information on contract funding, deliverables and milestones
schedules, current status, anticipated problems, period of
performance and key players of each contract delivery order. In
addition, IM receives monthly progress reports from all of our
contractors. These reports contain monthly cost of contractor work
based on labor hours, cumulative amount of delivery order from
inception to date of monthly bill and a written report of work
completed, problems encountered and anticipated. There is also a
monthly audit of all current delivery orders to verify labor hours,
current cost;, existing balance, cost overrun, pending invoices and
period of performance dates.
ATTACHMENT 1; ITEM 3 - Vulnerabilities declared under FMFIA
IM has no identified vulnerabilities already declared under FMFIA.
ATTACHMENT 1; ITEM 4 - Potential Vulnerabilities
Co-location is the only potential vulnerability IM may have at this
time. However, we have already implemented controls measures.
There are two contract persons located in IM space under contract
#68-W9-0052, Labat Anderson Inc. and #CQ-815281, National Caucus
and Center on Black Aged, Inc. Both contract employees wear
contractor identification that is visibly distinct from that of EPA
employees. Both contract employee work space is segregated from
EPA employee workspace. My staff has also been informed of EPA
contract management rules regarding contract employees and control
measures to prevent the performance of personal services, training
and entertaining of contractors.
ATTACHMENT 1; ITEM 5 - Major Regional Contracts
We do not oversee any major contracts in the Regions at this time.
-------
ATTACHMENT 1; ITEM 6 - Plans for Conducting a Review
A comprehensive review of all IM contracts and internal controls
has already begun. I am presently reviewing contract #68-WO-0043
(CSC) with my staff. On Tuesday, March 24 during our staff
meeting, all POs, DOPOs and WAMs will be given a questionnaire that
is designed to identify potential vulnerabilities and prohibited
contracting activities at EPA. The PO, DOPO and WAM will be
responsible for completing a questionnaire for each of the contract
delivery orders they manage. These questionnaires will be
returned to me for discussion at the next IM staff meeting on
March 31, 1992.
In addition^ each PO, DOPO and WAM will be given a copy of the
following questions as a guide for monitoring contract performance
situations that might be classified as an organizational conflict
of interest.
Is the contractor being asked to perform work that will
affect an industry of which it is a part, or for which it
derives a substantial portion of its income?
Is the contractor performing an analysis for EPA that
it is also performing for a firm that will be affected
by the results of that analysis?
Is the contractor performing consulting services for an
industry regulated by EPA at the same time as it is under
contract to EPA for any work on the same subject?
Do the work results provided by a contractor appear to
be lacking in complete objectivity from any aspect?
On any Superfund contracts, can the contractor
potentially be found liable as a responsible party
on any site for which it is being asked to perform
work for EPA?
Is there any possibility that even the appearance
of one of these situations might undermine the
credibility of the work results in the opinion of the
general public?
The Contracting Officers will be immediately notified when or if an
affirmative answer is given.
-------
All IM staff have attended the required Contract Management
training courses provided by EPA. IM staff who have not attended
the training during the past three years, have registered for the
recertlfication course for^EPA's contract managers to keep
abreast and increase their"knowledge of procurement and contract
administration. Also the existing internal controls for
contracts management explained in attachment 1; item 2; above
will remain effective.
ATTACHMENT 1; ITEM 7 - Impact of Terminating the CSC Contract
(SEE ATTACHED)
-------
CSC CONTRACT - DELIVERY ORDER 181
IMPACT OF TERMINATING CSC CONTRACT SUPPORT
Delivery Order 181 provides CSC support for the maintenance
and enhancement of OSWER's Data Resource Directory. This Directory
contains information about OSWER's automated information systems,
mathematical models, general categories of information related to
RCRA and CERCLA regulations, and the relationships among those
general categories of data. The information exists on the EPA IBM
mainframe where a custom version of Data Catalogue II has been
produced to accommodate OSWER's Directory needs. The information
also exists on a PC-based viewing system which allows any user to
find out about OSWER's systems, databases, organizations, and major
categories of information.
Amount of funding - At this time a modification to the DO has
just been implemented, with funding of $51,500 which would be spent
in the remainder of FY92.
&
Time needed for transition - Work on the Data Resource
Directory has been underway for about three years, if CSC is
terminated, the learning curve would start from zero in terms of
understanding the structure of the metadata (information about our
data) occurring on the mainframe software. The PC version of the
DRD would require knowledge of dBase IV (fairly commonly available)
but also knowledge of the structure of the PC-based system. When
support for the DRD switched from SYCOM to CSC, it took about two
months for CSC to become familiar with the dBase system. There
would be about a three month time interval for transition.
, *v\
Potential delays in work - The delivery of the PC version of
the DRD has already been delayed six months because of the
switchover of contractors and because of the length of the funding,
modification, and contract procedures. There would be at least
another four month delay in the delivery of the PC version, not
counting the paperwork and procedures for implementing a delivery
order for another contractor.
Submitted by Mary Lou Melley March 19, 1992
-------
CSC Contract - Delivery Order 166
IMPACT OF TERMINATING CSC CONTRACT SUPPORT
Delivery Order 166 provides CSC support for
- establishing guidelines and standards for development and
enhancement of automated office system applications used by
OSWER staff.
- compile compendium of office automation applications in
OSWER.
(complete)
- use Quality Action Teams to develop budget system that will
be useful for all OSWER budget staff in formulation of
Administrator and OMB budget submission.
- Concept; Development, Requirements Analysis, and System
Design documentation for a functional locator.
- Concept Requirements Analysis and System Design
documentation for OSWER Directives system.
- Data Resource Directory updates and enhancements, (complete)
AMOUNT OF FUNDING - Total funding on delivery order was
$198,919.88, of which $73,200. is remaining as of March 1, 1992.
'S;-.
TIME NEEDED FOR TRANSITION - Two' tasks are complete. The
transition time for the remaining tasks would be approximately a
month for a new contractor to review meeting minutes and the
documentation already completed.
POTENTIAL DELAYS IN WORK - Most critical delay would in be
providing support for the budget staff in developing the program
to merge budget data from all the program offices to create the
budget formats for the Administrator and OMB submissions.
Submitted by Kathy Barton 3/20/92
-------
\m.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
MAR 20 1932
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: OSWER Contracts Managementt
> WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
FROM: Tim Fields, Director
Superfund Revitalization ^eam
TO: Judy Kertcher, Director
Resources & Information Management
Here is the contracts management information you and Rich
had requested. The first part addresses the ongoing ARCS
management improvements in which the SRT Acquisition Manager is
involved and the second part cites potential vulnerabilities that
need to be addressed within OSWER.
o Ongoing improvements in which the SRT Acquisition Manager is
involved:
1. Formation of ARCS Council which:
a) oversees activities by OSWER, OARM and Regions to
implement recommendations of the ARCS Task Force
report;
b) serves as information transfer point for Regions and
OSWER for changes/improvements to ARCS management;
c) brings key issues to senior management of OSWER and
OARM for resolution concerning ARCS.
2. Tracks implementation of ARCS Task Force recommendations.
3. Oversees the implementation of the Superfund Long-Term
Contracting Strategy, which improves and decentralizes
management of Superfund contracts. This includes routine
Advisory Committee meetings of all affected offices,
frequent communications with the Regional Liaisons and
conveying management decisions to impacted organizations.
4. Oversees implementation of FMFIA corrective actions
identified for the Superfund Contract Laboratory Program.
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
o Potential vulnerabilities to be addressed in OSWER:
1. For mission or technical analyses contracts, the
relationship between HQ employees and contractors is not
"arm's length."
2. HQ middle management has expressed preferences for certain
team subcontractors which could be construed as directed
subcontracting to the prime.
3. Thorough review of all invoices remains a weakness dependent
upon the time available to the Project Officers; few written
procedures in place for this effort. Specific training
given only to OERR WAMs and within RCRA training course, but
no large emphasis on its importance.
4. Tremendous lags in incurred cost and indirect cost audits.
AA/SWER has already requested additional support but IG did
not get resources this year. No way for the programs to
know what is contained in the indirects; only auditors can
see these costs because they are billed to the program as a
percentage.
5. Fixed fee nature of HQ contracts limits ways to provide
incentives to improve contractor performance, but is
contrasted with perception that award fees constitute
"bonuses."
cc: Ika Joiner
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
MAR 2 5 1992
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: OUST's Contracts Manage
FROM: David Ziegele, Director
Office of Underground S
TO: Judy Kertcher, Director
Resources and Information Management Staff
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
In response to your March 17, 1992 memorandum regarding
management of contracts, attached is OUST's submission. First,;|
we attach a table which lists each of our contracts and includes
the following information: the general area of support; j
beginning and end dates of the contract; name of the project
officer; the total capacity of the contract and amount funded to
date; and principal work assignment managers (where applicable).
Second, we have addressed the remaining issues, such as internal
controls, vulnerabilities, etc., in bullet format, beginning on
the second page of the attachment. Finally, OUST's
representative to OSWER's Quality Assurance Team is Karen
Ellenberger.
Please call Karen (at 308-8862) or me if you have any
questions regarding the information we've submitted regarding -
OUST's contracts management.
Attachment
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Contractors to the Office of Underground Storage Tanks EPA
OUST CONTRACTOR
CONTRACT NO.
ICF Inc.
Economics
68-W9-0082
ICF Inc.
Implementation
Support
68-WO-0024
Midwest Research
Institute(MRI)
Technical
68-WO-0015
Nancy Low &
Associates(NL&A)
Comm. & Mktg.
Support
68-WO-0030
GENERAL AREA
OF SUPPORT
Analyses of costs,
economic impacts &
benefits of policies
and action pertaining
to UST and LUST
programs.
Provides technical,
programmatic,and
institutional assis-
tance in implementing
UST and LUST programs.
Work is focussed in
three priority areas:
state program approval;
leak detection compliance
and enforcement; and
corrective action.
i.d. and evaluate
methods and techno-
logies to prevent and
detect leaks from USTs
and perform corrective
action after leaks.
Support for market
research and analysis,
preparation of communi-
cation plans and marketing
strategies, production
and distribution of
o'utreach materials
and project evaluation.
CONTRACT
BEGIN/END OF
10/1/89-9/30/92
5/25/90-5/24/93
PROJ. OFFICER
Stephanie Bergman
308-8879
Brenda Smith
308-8870
3/1/98-2/28/93
6/29/90-6/30/93
Vinay Kumar
308-8872
Debbie Rutherford
308-8864
TOTAL CAPACITY/
FUNDED TO DATE
$3.8 million
$2.0 million
$9.0 million
$4.4 million
$6.3 million
$2.8 million
$3.0 million
$ .9 million
PRINCIPAL
WAMs
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Karen Ellenberger
Debbie Rutherford
-------
Internal Controls
OUST has a number of internal controls in place which apply
to all of our contracts. Listed below are the types of controls
OUST exercises in managing our contracts.
Work Assignment Managers
routinely provide input to the project officers on
contractor's performance (technical quality of products,
timeliness of delivery, compliance with budget) on specific
work assignments
maintain frequent communications with contractor's project
managers to provide clear direction on work assignment
requirements and feedback on contractor's performance under
the work assignment
Project Officers
have all taken the required project officer training offered
through the EPA Institute and are certified to serve in that
capacity
- are senior level employees with extensive contracts
management experience
communicate regularly with the contracting
specialist/officer to keep abreast of issues and events
germane to OUST's contracts
have clear understanding of OUST's expectations for project
officers—standards are detailed in each project officer's
performance agreement
conduct monthly meetings with contractor's project managers
and an OUST Branch Chief who represents our Management Team
to review performance on work assignments, identify issues,
and take remedial action to ensure quality work is performed
on a timely basis at a reasonable cost
review work assignments, work plans, and modifications to
ensure the effort requested of the contractor fits within
the scope of work of the contract and does not request
contractors to undertake work which is prohibited or
inappropriate
Work Assignment Managers and Project Officers
review monthly progress reports against invoices prior to
actual payment, ensuring that charges are correct,
appropriate, and conform to requirements in the contract
-------
issue and track specific subtasks under broader work
assignments to allow closer management of work and ensure
that deliverables are of high technical quality, within
budget, and on time
Branch Chief/Operating Funds Officer/Management Team Advisor on
Contracts Management
meets with project officers to discuss performance of
contractors, identify issues and potential problem areas,
and determine remedial steps so as to ensure OUST receives
high quality deliverables which are reasonably priced on a
timely basis
ensures internal controls for sound financial management are
followed
o reviews and approves work assignments to ensure
obligation of funds is consistent with OUST's FY92
operating plan as developed and approved by OUST's
Management Team
meets with OUST's Office Director and other senior managers
to discuss significant activities and issues related to
OUST's contracts management
- reviews and signs all Action Request Forms (for issuing work
assignments and modifications and approving work plans) as
part of the standard review and approval chain, which also
includes: work assignment manager, Branch Chief/Management
Team advisor, officers for automated data processing
ramifications, project officer, and contracting officer
Office Director
- provides clear guidance to staff on process to access a
contractor
- dedicates staff resources to a "procurement team" tasked
with developing an unambiguous request for proposals and
establishing clear evaluation criteria. OUST's new
procurements will be offered in a full and open competitive
process to solicit proposals from a wide variety of
offerers.
reviews new.contract procurements and certifies they have
adequate evaluation criteria and conform to Agency
requirements; OUST works closely with EPA's Procurement and
Contracts Management Division (PCMD) in developing
procurement packages
-------
Issues
OUST's issues focus primarily on a few areas where we would
like to see improvement in some of the services EPA's Procurement
and Contracts Management Division (PCMD) provides to us. In
particular, PCMD should:
work to improve its turnaround time in processing routine
contracts management paperwork: we have experienced
excessively long delays in PCMD's processing of our work
assignments, modifications, work plan approvals, procurement
requests, and requests to exercise options
strive to decrease the high turnover rate in contract
specialists and hire contract specialists with more
experience and familiarity with contracts issues
improve PCMD's training
o training to certify work assignment managers and
project officers needs to be offered more frequently to
accommodate demand, and should provide additional
practical information on responsibilities and duties of
project officers and work assignment managers
- strengthen existing outreach efforts and develop more
formal/routine communications systems from the contracting
specialists/officers to program project officers to ensure
program offices are kept abreast of contract management
issues, such as recertification requirements, changes to
procurement requirements, PCMD's expectations, etc.
Vulnerabilities Already Declared
none
Potential Vulnerabilities
a few of OUST's work assignment managers are not certified
o as training is available, these work assignment
managers will participate in the training and obtain
official certification
OUST currently has a video consultant co-located on site two
days per week; however, we have justified her presence to
PCMD, received PCMD's approval for her to be on site, and
-------
have modified the contract appropriately. Additionally, we
have clearly identified her as a consultant to staff.
Major Contracts in Regions
OUST's contracts are managed in Headquarters; however, the
Regions do access our contracts via work assignments. All
controls in Headquarters are applied to Regional work
assignments. In addition, Regional work assignments require
approval of Regional management as well as Headquarters'
management.
o the scope of work in OUST's contracts expressly permits
use of the contracts by the Regions
Plan and Schedule for Comprehensive Review
beginning in April (through the end of June), OUST will
review our four contracts to ensure they are being managed
correctly and appropriately, and to identify potential
vulnerabilities and activities to remedy our deficiencies
o PCMD performed an in-depth "Blue Team" review of our
contracts in January 1991. They verbally debriefed us
on their findings; however, they never developed a
written report. OUST held follow-up meetings with our
contractors to review the findings and identify ways to
improve.
o PCMD performed a follow-up review in January 1992 and
will submit a written report to OUST. OUST will meet
with PCMD to discuss their findings, meet with
contractors to review the findings, and identify
remedial action to improve deficiencies.
Impact of CSC Contract Termination
OUST uses the CSC contract to access ATLIS, a subcontractor
to CSC, who provides us with distribution management
services
o DOPO: Beverly Thomas
o amount of funding: $130,000 for FY92
o time needed for transition: 2 to 4 months if we begin
to use EPIC; up to 1 year if we have to recompete
-------
- 5 -
training and experience in managing work assignments is higher
than many staff persons in CED. This DOPO had provided
assistance to other staff in CED in preparation of statements of
work for other work assignments.
In addition to this background, the DOPO had requested that
the OIRM contract staff provide an "orientation" to using the
TOSS contract and more specific information relating to reporting
requirements. However, this was not done by OIRM. OIRM
acknowledged that such an orientation was necessary but, as
previously stated, OIRM indicated numerous reassignments of
contact people and managers of the various delivery orders.
Hence, the detailed technical information related to the TOSS
contract was unavailable to the DOPO.
Within CED, our Contract Management Section provides
orientation and technical support to work assignment managers
using the Technical Enforcement Support (TES) contracts. The
Section also provide manuals and reliable staff for questions
from work assignment managers. The technical skill required for
this particular project was not available under a TES contract at
the time DO 134 was initiated. However, during the last quarter
of the this work assignment, the new TES contract did offer
contractors which had the required skills. The DOPO immediately
initiated efforts to transition the work assignment to the TFS
contract. While CSC/NMI actively resisted this transition, th^
DOPO was successful in effecting a transfer of responsibility.
At the time he was managing DO 134, he was also responsible
for managing three other work assignments and also had full r. •. -^
responsibilities in his work as a program analyst in the Cost
Recovery Branch. He was also involved in several Division
related activities and cross Divisional activities with FMD ^- •.
OE. While his time was spread thinly over these areas, the
DOPO's work in these areas was of very good quality.
b. Contractor documents .were submitted late to EPA.
The DOPO frequently requested timely submittal of the
progress reports from the contractor, as well as invoice
statements from the contract office in RTF. CSC/NMI were very
unresponsive to these requests, despite repeated calls and nc--^--
to managers in both companies. Often the two documents were
received several months apart. Especially frustrating were
frequent cases when RTP invoices were received after the dat--
required for signature and return.
The lags between the time the work was performed, the t:-• .
the progress reports were received, and the time invoices we:-
received severely complicated efforts to monitor and evaluat- •
contractor performance. Despite these constraints, the DOPC •
substantial efforts to match these documents and determine i:
-------
- 6 -
performance, documentation, and invoices were consistent. The
DOPO retained copies of all documents received from both sources,
though linking the two together was often extremely difficult.
c. DOPO did not maintain adequate delivery order '
documentation.
Much of the documentation suggested in the position paper as
necessary .inclusions in the DOPO's files (e.g. monthly invoices,
progress reports) was provided to the auditors during the audit.
As mentioned earlier, the TOSS User's Manual, the copy of the
TOSS contract and other materials which originated in OIRM were
not provided to the DOPO until after the audit began.
With regard to your comments emphasizing written versus
verbal communication to the contractor, the DOPO determined that
for routine tasks (e.g. requests to produce monthly reports)
verbal communication was sufficient. Substantive changes
concerning DO 134 were communicated in writing. Additionally,
the need for rapid response to information requests often
precluded the opportunity to communicate with the contractor in
writing. There was a long history of working with NMI on the
project and verbal communication of requests had generally been -
successful. To require the DOPO to provide detailed letters or
descriptions on a routine basis would have even further strained
limited staff resources.
With regard to the question relating to "minutes of meetings
with contractors," there were relatively few meetings between
CSC, NMI and the DOPO. Most requests were conducted over the
phone, because of NMI's familiarity with the project. We would
be interested in receiving copies of the minutes of such meetings
that NMI has presented to the OIG, given the rarity of such
formal gatherings.
Additionally, the limited communication with OIRM was also
handled on the_phone. These communications were further
complicated by the continual flux in persons in OIRM responsible
for coordinating with CED on DO 134 and other delivery orders.
The comment relating to the DOPO contacting CSC/NMI for
progress reports during your audit relates to the previously
described problem of getting both the contractor and RTP to
provide timely documentation- CSC, as well as other EPA
contractors, must be frequently urged to provide proper arid
timely documentation.
Regarding the point relating to direct contact with the
subcontractor (NMI) rather than the prime (CSC), working with ~-:~
prime contractor is, of course, the preferred option and tho
approach normally utilized by the DOPO for DO 134. However,
direct contact with the subcontractor in some cases vas
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCV
--. .WASHINGTON. D.C. 2046O*•*.•—,•./..,,
MAR 19 1992
TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIOM (
V;.:
NOTET
Subject:
FROM:
TO:
March 24 Submissions on
Contract Management
Thorn De Kay
Spec. Asst. td^the Director
TIO
Judy Kertcher
Director, R&IM
The attached is in response to your
March 17 Memorandum requesting input!
from OSWER Office Directors concernir
in-house contract management practicd
If I can be of further assistance, let
me know.
<•-&
P.S. As you can see, Walt wants
be the TIO rep. on the QAT...;y*
will await instructions for th
1st meeting!
»-#•
-------
u
-------
1AR 1 9 1392
PY
Mr,,', -3 -•*
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: TIO Contract Management Program Activities
From: Walter W. Kovalick, Jr., Ph.D.
Director
Technology Innovation Office
To: Richard J. Guimond
Deputy Assistant Administrator
The purpose of this memorandum is to appraise you of the nature of the
contracts and the contracts management practices that we have in the TIO. You wilt
note that our staff of 20 FTE is highly leveraged in its use of extramural dollars to
provide training and to carry out technology information and analysis functions.
Presently, Thorn De Kay of my staff manages all TIO sponsored contracts.
Currently, TIO oversees a 4-year OSWER Mission Support (LOE) Contract with EMS,
Inc. and a 4-year OSWER Dedicated Training Support (LOE) Contract with PRC-EM!.
Thorn serves as Project Officer for each of these contracts; I have attached a profile
of each for your information. I have also attached a profile of a completed Mission
Support (LOE) Contract with ICF, Inc. that TIO managed. Audit histories are noted
on these profiles.
In addition, TIO staff members have accessed other agency contracts (10 over
the last year) and serve as Work Assignment Managers on these contracts. A profile
of these Work Assignments is attached.
Thorn De Kay will serve as TIO's representative on the OSWER Quality
Assurance Team (QAT).
-------
-2-
Manaoement Controls in Place:
Each potential Work Assignment Manager (WAM) must have completed
the PCMD sponsored "Contract Administration Course" and the "Project
Officer Training Course" prior to acting as a WAM for any TIO contract.
Each of the TIO contractors and their sub-contractor representatives
have been given a formal orientation/briefing by the Project Officer. At
this meeting, admonitions against doing work outside the Scope of Work
(SOW) of the contract/work assignment {which results in penalties of
non-payment for this work), the procedures for subcontractors'
participation in the contract, and basic rules for doing day-to-day
business are discussed. In addition, reporting procedures and
information to be contained in monthly activity reports and financial
reports is relayed to the contractors.
Monthly meetings are scheduled with principal parties of each of the
contracts where problem areas are discussed and resolved;
Each 'buy-in' assignment (i.e. another OSWER office staff member
serves as the principal WAM) is assigned a TIO co-Work Assignment
Manager so that each WA issued under TIO contracts is monitored.
Each request for a buy-in is accompanied by a reminder of Agency policy
concerning not directing of work to sub-contractors -- this is a firm rule
observed by TIO);
WAMs are provided monthly reports and are urged to review and report
any questions to the Project Officer;
Each Work Assignment contains the requirement that "a copy of each
deliverable is to be given to the Project Officer," so that a complete file
of contract deliverables can be maintained. (This has been important to
various audits or requests for information from Congressional staffs that
have accompanied the contracts). This requirement is also in place for
any and all correspondence related to a particular Work Assignment;
All requests for work outside the approved Work Assignment Workplans
are required to be communicated through the Project Officer to the
Contractor — the PO either issues a formal WA amendment or a technical
directive (TD), so that a "paper trail" can be maintained for each
additional or changed requirement. Without the PO's signature/approval,
the contractor is not authorized to institute any change to the approved
SOW.
-------
-3-
4 Each contractor must provide the PO with a list of all monthly
expenditures of hours, Other Than Direct Costs (ODC's) -- including
travel, copying, messenger service, etc. — with the monthly activity
report. This list is used by the PO in approving monthly vouchers.
4 Vouchers are approved only by the PO, after a review of the monthly
activity reports that contain information concerning deliverables. This
policy holds true even for 'discount' vouchers where rapid turn-around
is requested by the PCMD Finance Division. If there is no monthly report
for review, there is no sign-off on the voucher -- even though discount
or reduced costs are involved.
4 The PO is responsible for communicating to WAMs any changes in
contract procedures/rules issued by PCMD.
4 The PO is responsible to answer any audit or formal inquiry concerning
TIO sponsored contracts. To date, once an interview has taken place
where TIO safeguards have been explained or demonstrated, TIO
contracts have been dropped from post-audit reports.
Management Controls to be Instituted:
Although we believe these management practices are effective, there are areas
of potential improvement that TIO is presently addressing:
4 Based on needs expressed by WAMs, a 2-3 hour in-house Seminar on
estimating the hours/costs involved in issuing a WA is planned, as well
as a refresher course for all WAMs.
4 On-site contractor staff (presently 2 employees) will be removed from
TIO space in the Crystal Station facility by April 1, 1992.
Attachments
-------
-------
9 1S92
EPA # 68-W2-0004
OSWER Mission Support Contract
Environmental Management Support, Inc. (EMS)
Feb. 2, 1992-Jan. 31, 1996
Contract Profile
The purpose of this contract is to obtain the analytical, technical, and
management support required by various OSWER program offices. The work required
under this contract requires the contractor to prepare and conduct analytical studies
of OSWER program strategies and regulatory initiatives.
The work elements of this contract have been organized into three areas:
-- General analysis and strategic planning;
-- General support for technology transfer programs, research and development,
and training support as related to Technology Transfer issues; and
-- Graphic Arts support.
The Contract statement of work is attached. There are 15 active assignments.
Contract Statistics:
Negotiated Hours
Base Year: 1/21/92 - 1/31/93; 30,000 hrs. @ $1,644,300
Op. Yr. I: 2/1/93-1/31/94; 30,000 hrs. @ $1,698,921
Op. Yr. II: 2/1/94 - 1/31/95; 30,000 hrs. @ $1,755,582
Op. Yr. Ill: 2/1/95 - 1/31/96; 30,000 hrs. @ $1,814,916
Totals: 4 years performance; 120,000 hrs. @$6,913,719
Cost + Fee: $5,913,723
ODC's: $ 999,996
FTE Equiv.: 14.5 per year (@2,080 man-hours)
-------
-------
EPA # 68-W2-0004
OSWER Mission Support Contract
EMS
Feb. 2, 1992 -Jan. 31, 1996
AUDIT SUMMARY:
None
PROJECT OFFICER: Thomas R. De Kay
OSWER/TIO
OS-110W
Tel. # 703/ 308-8798
Work Assignment Managers: (OSWER)
Argain, Karen (TIO)
De Kay, Thomas (TIO)
Fiedler, Linda (TIO)
Forlini, Michael (TIO)
Kingscott, John (TIO)
S. Bala Krishnan (ORD - De Kay)
Perdek, Joyce (RREL, Edison, N.J. - De Kay)
Powell, Daniel (TIO)
Smith, Naomi (TIO)
Steimle, Richard (TIO)
# # #
-------
-------
"32
•- w *-
EPA # 68-WO-0034
OSWER Dedicated Training Support Contract
Planning Research Corp. - Environmental Mangement, Inc. (PRC-EMI)
Jul. 9, 1990-Jul. 8, 1994
Contract Profile
The purpose of this contract is to provide the technical support required to
implement a systematic analysis of OSWER-related training needs and to plan, design,
develop, and deliver a national training program.
The work elements of this contract include:
-- Analysis of training/workforce management needs;
-- Design, development, and delivery of training;
-- Technical support for OSWER's Technology Transfer Program, including the
SITE program, as it relates to dissemination of information; and
-- Graphic support for management briefings.
The contract statement of work is attached. There have been 18 completed
work assignments, and 19 assignments are currently active (total 37).
Contract Statistics:
Negotiated hours
Base Year: 7/9/90 - 7/8/91; 27,500 hours @ $1,688,555
Op. Yr. I: 7/9/91 - 7/8/92; 27,500 hours @ $1,732,622
Op. Yr. II: 7/9/92 - 7/8/93; 27,500 hours @ $1,778,508
Op. Yr. Ill: 7/9/93 - 7/8/94; 27,500 hours @ $1,826,331
Totals: 4 years performance; 110,000 hours @ $7,026,016
Cost + Fee: $5,719,516
ODC's: $1,306,500
FTE Equiv.: 13.2 per year (@2,080 man-hours)
-------
-------
EPA # 68-WO-0034
OSWER Dedicated Training Support Contract
PRC-EMI
7/9/90 - 7/8/94
AUDIT SUMMARY
Feb. 1992 - Region III - IG Audit - Review of Superfund Contracts
PROJECT OFFICER: Thomas R. De Kay
OSWER/TIO
OS-110W
Tel. # 703/ 308-8798
Work Assignment Managers:
Argain, Karen (TIO)
De Kay, Thomas (TIO)
Fiedler, Linda (TIO)
Gray, Edward (TIO)
Latka, Mary (OERR - De Kay)
Marini, Steven (TIO)
Quander, John (TIO)
Seitz, Fred (OSW - De Kay)
Suit, Marlene (TIO
# #
-------
-------
MAR 1 3 "32
EPA #68-01-7481
OSWER Mission Support Contract
ICF, Inc.
(Oct. 1. 1987 - Mar. 31. 1991)
Contract Profile
The purpose of this contract was to obtain the analytical, technical, and
management services of a contractor to support various OSWER programs. The goal
of this contracting effort was to provide the AA/OSWER with support required to
cr.a.yzc p^ cv o^ . ,6 ad design appropriate systems and procedures to improve EPA
programs.
The work elements of this contract were organized into three major work areas:
Research and development, technology transfer and training support;
General policy analysis and strategic planning; and
Risk-benefit and risk assessment methodological studies.
The Contract statement of work is attached. (96 Work Assignments were
completed during the period of performance).
Contract Statistics:
Negotiated Hours
Base Year: 10/1/87 - 3/31/89 ; 72,000 hrs. @ $3,308,431
Op. Yr. I: 4/1/89-3/31/90; 36,000 hrs. @ $1,771,721
Op. Yr. II: 4/1/90 - 3/31/91; 36,000 hrs. @ $1,835,423
Totals: 3 years performance; 144,000 hrs. @$7,016,574
Invoiced Totals: 3 years performance; 107,690 hrs. @ $6,368,135
Cost + Fee: $6,008,450
ODC: $ 359,685
FTE Equiv.: 17.3 per year (@2,080 man-hours)
-------
-------
EPA #68-01-7481
OSWER Mission Support Contract
ICF, Inc.
Oct. 1, 1987 -Mar. 31, 1991
Audit Summary
1990-1992
1990:
Feb -- Cong. Inquiry (Dingell Committee) - Review of SF Contracts
May - Reg. II - IG Audit - Review of SF Contracts
1991:
Feb -- Cong. Inquiry (Dingell Committee) - Request for File copies
Jul -- Region V - IG Audit - Review of SF Contracts
Nov -- GAO Audit - Review of Contracts with "Consultant" clauses
1992:
Feb -- Region III - IG Audit - Review of SF Contracts
NB:
1. The audits/Congressional Inquiries represent formal meetings where actual
copies of contract information were transferred to the interviewer by the Project
Officer. This list does not contain information about telephone inquiries from
Congressional Staff members, the EPA IG, or GAO where the contract was discussed
-- these conversations generally centered around the "consultant clause" of the
contract that was not exercised during the contract performance period.
2. Following each interview listed above, no further action was
required/requested and this contract was subsequently deleted from inquiry reports.
# * #
-------
-------
EPA #68-01-7481
OSWER Mission Support Contract
ICF, Inc.
Oct. 1, 1987--Mar. 31, 1991
Project Officer:
Thomas R. De Kay
OSWER/TIO
OS-110W
Tel. # 703/ 308-8798
Work Assignment Managers (OSWER)
Bahnick, Joseph
Burgan, Karen
Calvan, Rita
Chemerys, Ruth
Cruickshank, James
De Kay, Thomas
Donovan, Kevin
Ellenberger, Karen
Ferenbach, Marjorie
Fiedler, Linda
Fields, Timothy
Gleason, Lee Anne
Gray, Edward
Haley, Jennifer
Harris, Pam
Jones, Timothy
Keffer, William (Reg. 7)
Kingscott, John
Kremer, Fran (RREL Cinn.)
LaPointe, Elizabeth
McMaster, James
Marini, Steven
Meeley, Marianne
Morgan, Nick
Musgrove, Venessa
O'Leary, James
Pheiffer, Thomas
Prins, Chris
Quinn, Janet
Steimle, Richard
Suit, Marlene
Tulis, Dana
Whelan, Thomas
Wilhelm, Ronald
Yurman, Daniel
Zaragoza, Lawrence
#
-------
-------
Agency Contracts Utilized by TIO
(Buy-ins 1991-92)
Contract I/Contractor
Period of Performance
$ Amount + Hours
Est.FTE
68-C8-0062 / SAIC
(PO - David Ferguson, RREL, Cinn.)
WA# 3-75
Forum on Innovative Hazardous
Waste Treatment Technologies:
Domestic and International
(Thomas De Kay -WAM) 11/18/91 - 12/30/92
$150,146 4 2000 hrs.
.96
F08635-90-C-0380 / Delta Corporation
(IAG #DW57933881 / USAF
PO - David Graham, OCEM (Hq.))
WA# 91-2
Support for NACEPT Focus Group
(Thomas De Kay - WAM) 6/1 /90 - 9/1 /92
$185,000 * 3000 hrs.
1.44
68-WO-0032 / RTI
(PO - Norma Hughes, OSW (Hq.))
WA #11
Analytical Support for Utilization
of TSDR - RCRA Market Survey
(Michael Forlini - WAM) 3/8/91 - 10/31/92
$30,000 * 500 hrs.
.24
68-W1-0005 / Booz-Allen & Hamilton
(PO - Fran Hanavan, OERR (Hq.))
WA # F-34
Superfund Retention/Development
(procedures materials)
(Karen Argain - WAM) 3/29/91 - 7/31/92
$362,313 4 8,200 hrs.
3.94
WA # F-42
Development of a Technology Primer
(Jim Cummings - WAM) 5/9/91 - 9/30/91
$9,949 • 225 hrs.
.11
WA # F-43
Logistical Support, Fed. Remediaton Roundtable Meetings
(Dan Powell - WAM) 5/8/91 - 1-31-92
$46,661 « 1,000 hrs.
.48
-------
-------
-2-
WA # F-44
Community Relations Project (prepare
fact sheets on Inn. Treatment Tech.s)
(Nancy Dean - WAM) 5/21/91 - 3/30/92
$64,029 4 1,450 hrs.
.70
WA #F-48
Procurement Procedures Guidelines
(fact sheets on regional experiences)
(Nancy Dean - WAM) 6/17/91 - 7/30/92
WA # F-52
International Trip Report Compilation
(Thomas De Kay - WAM) 6/24/91 -12/31/91
$55,042 4 1,200 hrs. .58
$14,375 4 300 hrs. .14
WA * F-72
Analysis of SF Site Remedies
selected in RODS (Treatment Trains)
(Linda Fiedler - WAM) 12/12/91 - 7/31/92
$13,160 4 300 hrs.
.14
68-CO-0047 / PRC-EMI
(PO - Wm. Frietsch, RREL, Cinn.)
WA #0-36
Innovative Treatment Tech. Database
(Linda Fiedler - WAM) 21/1/92-12/31/92
$350,000 4 6,150 hrs. 2.96
WA # 0-38
Semi-Annual Status Reports
(analysis of SF sites using
innovative technologies)
Linda Fiedler - WAM)
21/1/91 - 12/31/92
$62,766 4 1,000 hrs.
.48
WA # 0-39
Market Report for Innovative Treatment Technologies
(Linda Fiedler - WAM) 12/91 - 12/31/92
$20,000 4 300 hrs.
.14
68-D1-0022/TRI
(PO - Alfred Galli, ORD (Hq.))
WA # 2-4
Revision of Tech. Support Director for
RCRA Correction Action and SF Site Remed.
(Dan Powell - WAM) 8/26/91 - 3/31/92
$20,000 4 320 hrs.
.15
-------
-------
-3-
68-WO-0036 / Roy F. Weston
(PO - Esther Williford. OSW (Hq.))
WA #TD 129011-001, A-F
Removal Applicatons Project
(ID use of innovative technologies in the SF
Emergency Response Program)
(Dan Powell - WAM) 11/90-3/31/92
$50,000 * 1,125 hrs.
.54
68-C9-0033 / Foster-Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc.
(PO - S. Rosenthal, RREL, Edison, N.J.)
WA# 2-R044
Eval. of Hazardous Waste Remediation Technologies
(Jim Cummings - WAM) 10/1/91 - 4/1/92
$50,000 * 578 hrs.
.28
68-C8-0058 / Dynamac
(PO - John Mathews, RSKERL, Ada, Ok.)
WA # 2HQ 1
OSWER Technology Support Program
(Richard Steimle - WAM) 10/1/91 - 9/31/92
$50,000 * 1,000 hrs.
.48
68-CO-0083 / ICF. Inc.
(PO - Miriam Romblad, Ofc. of Water (Hq.))
WA # 0-28
Anal, and logistical support to
Fed. Remediation Rountable
(Richard Steimle - WAM) 5/6/90 - 5/30/91
$295,000 4 4,185 hrs.
2.01
TOTALS:
$1.828,441 4 32.833 hrs. 15.78
-------
-------
EPA # 68-WO-0034
OSWER Dedicated Training Support Contract
PRC-EMI
7/9/90 - 7/8/94
AUDIT SUMMARY
Feb. 1992 - Region III - IG Audit - Review of Superfund Contracts
PROJECT OFFICER: Thomas R. De Kay
OSWER/TIO
OS-110W
Tel. # 703/ 308-8798
Work Assignment Managers:
Argain, Karen (TIO)
De Kay, Thomas (TIO)
Fiedler, Linda (TIO)
Gray, Edward (TIO)
Latka, Mary (OERR - De Kay)
Marini, Steven (TIO)
Quander, John (TIO)
Seitz, Fred (OSW - De Kay)
Suit, Marlene (TIO
# #
-------
-------
EPA #68-01-7481
OSWER Mission Support Contract
ICF, Inc.
(Oct. 1, 1987 - Mar. 31, 1991)
Contract Profile
The purpose of this contract was to obtain the analytical, technical, and
management services of a contractor to support various OSWER programs. The goal
of this contracting effort was to provide the AA/OSWER with support required to
analyze policy options and design appropriate systems and procedures to improve EPA
programs.
The work elements of this contract were organized into three major work areas:
Research and development, technology transfer and training support;
General policy analysis and strategic planning; and
Risk-benefit and risk assessment methodological studies.
The Contract statement of work is attached. (96 Work Assignments were
completed during the period of performance).
Contract Statistics:
Negotiated Hours
Base Year: . 10/1/87 - 3/31/89 ; 72,000 hrs. @ $3,308,431
Op. Yr. I: 4/1/89-3/31/90; 36,000 hrs. @ $1,771,721
Op. Yr. II: 4/1/90 - 3/31/91; 36,000 hrs. @ $1,835,423
Totals: 3 years performance; 144,000 hrs. @$7,016,5.74
Invoiced Totals: 3 years performance; 107,690 hrs. @ $6,368,135
Cost + Fee: $6,008,450
ODC: $ 359,685
FTE Equiv.: 17.3 per year (@2,080 man-hours)
-------
-------
EPA #68-01-7481
OSWER Mission Support Contract
ICF, Inc.
Oct. 1, 1987 - Mar. 31, 1991
Audit Summary
1990-1992
1990:
Feb -- Cong. Inquiry (Dingell Committee) - Review of SF Contracts
May - Reg. II - IG Audit - Review of SF Contracts
1991:
Feb -- Cong. Inquiry (Dingell Committee) - Request for File copies
Jul -- Region V - IG Audit - Review of SF Contracts
Nov ~ GAO Audit - Review of Contracts with "Consultant" clauses
1992:
Feb -- Region III - IG Audit - Review of SF Contracts
NB:
1. The audits/Congressional Inquiries represent formal meetings where actual
copies of contract information were transferred to the interviewer by the Project
Officer. This list does not contain information about telephone inquiries from
Congressional Staff members, the EPA IG, or GAO where the contract was discussed
~ these conversations generally centered around the "consultant clause" of the
contract that was not exercised during the contract performance period.
2. Following each interview listed above, no further action was
required/requested and this contract was subsequently deleted from inquiry reports.
# #
-------
-------
EPA #68-01-7481
OSWER Mission Support Contract
ICF, Inc.
Oct. 1, 1987 --Mar. 31, 1991
Project Officer:
Thomas R. De Kay
OSWER/TIO
OS-110W
Tel. # 703/ 308-8798
Work Assignment Managers (OSWER)
Bahnick, Joseph
Burgan, Karen
Calvan, Rita
Chemerys, Ruth
Cruickshank, James
De Kay, Thomas
Donovan, Kevin
Ellenberger, Karen
Ferenbach, Marjorie
Fiedler, Linda
Fields, Timothy
Gleason, Lee Anne
Gray, Edward
Haley, Jennifer
Harris, Pam
Jones, Timothy
Keffer, William (Reg. 7)
Kingscott, John
Kremer, Fran (RREL Cinn.)
LaPointe, Elizabeth
McMaster, James
Marini, Steven
Meeley, Marianne
Morgan, Nick
Musgrove, Venessa
O'Leary, James
Pheiffer, Thomas
Prins, Chris
Quinn, Janet
Steimle, Richard
Suit, Marlene
Tulis, Dana
Whelan, Thomas
Wilhelm, Ronald
Yurman, Daniel
Zaragoza, Lawrence
# #
-------
-------
Agency Contracts Utilized by TIO
(Buy-ins 1991-92)
Q '-'
Contract I/Contractor
Period of Performance
$ Amount » Hours
Est.FTE
68-C8-0062 / SAIC
(PO - David Ferguson, RREL, Cinn.)
WA# 3-75
Forum on Innovative Hazardous
Waste Treatment Technologies:
Domestic and International
(Thomas De Kay -WAM) 11/18/91 - 12/30/92
$150,146 4 2000 hrs.
.96
F08635-90-C-0380 / Delta Corporation
(IAG #DW57933881 / USAF
PO - David Graham, OCEM (Hq.))
WA# 91-2
Support for NACEPT Focus Group
(Thomas De Kay - WAM) 6/1 /90 - 9/1 /92
$185,000 * 3000 hrs.
1.44
68-WO-0032 / RTI
(PO - Norma Hughes, OSW (Hq.))
WA #11
Analytical Support for Utilization
of TSDR - RCRA Market Survey
(Michael Forlini - WAM) 3/8/91 - 10/31/92
$30,000 4 500 hrs.
.24
68-W1-0005 / Booz-Allen & Hamilton
(PO - Fran Hanavan, OERR (Hq.))
WA # F-34
Superfund Retention/Development
(procedures materials)
(Karen Argain - WAM) 3/29/91 - 7/31/92
$362,313 * 8,200 hrs.
3.94
WA # F-42
Development of a Technology Primer
(Jim Cummings - WAM) 5/9/91 - 9/30/91
$9,949 • 225 hrs.
.11
WA # F-43
Logistical Support, Fed. Remediaton Roundtable Meetings
(Dan Powell - WAM) 5/8/91 - 1-31-92
$46,661 * 1,000 hrs.
.48
-------
-2-
WA # F-44
Community Relations Project (prepare
fact sheets on Inn. Treatment Tech.s)
(Nancy Dean - WAM) 5/21/91 - 3/30/92
$64,029 4 1,450hrs.
.70
WA #F-48
Procurement Procedures Guidelines
(fact sheets on regional experiences)
(Nancy Dean - WAM) 6/17/91 - 7/30/92
WA # F-52
International Trip Report Compilation
(Thomas De Kay - WAM) 6/24/91
12/31/91
$55,042 4 1,200hrs. .58
$14,375 4 300 hrs. .14
WA # F-72
Analysis of SF Site Remedies
selected in RODS (Treatment Trains)
(Linda Fiedler - WAM) 12/12/91 - 7/31/92
$13,160 4 300 hrs.
.14
68-CO-0047 / PRC-EMI
(PO - Wm. Frietsch, RREL, Cinn.)
WA #0-36
Innovative Treatment Tech. Database
(Linda Fiedler - WAM) 21/1/92 - 12/31/92
$350,000 4 6,150 hrs. 2.96
WA # 0-38
Semi-Annual Status Reports
(analysis of SF sites using
innovative technologies)
Linda Fiedler - WAM)
21/1/91 - 12/31/92
$62,766 4 1,000 hrs.
.48
WA # 0-39
Market Report for Innovative Treatment Technologies
(Linda Fiedler - WAM) 12/91 - 12/31/92
$20,000 4 300 hrs.
.14
68-D1-0022/TRI
(PO - Alfred Galli, ORD (Hq.))
WA # 2-4 .
Revision of Tech. Support Director for
RCRA Correction Action and SF Site Remed.
(Dan Powell - WAM) 8/26/91 - 3/31/92
$20,000 4 320 hrs.
.15
-------
-3-
68-WO-0036 / Roy F. Weston
(PO - Esther Williford, OSW (Hq.))
WA #TD 129011-001, A-F
Removal Applicatons Project
(ID use of innovative technologies in the SF
Emergency Response Program)
(Dan Powell - WAM) 11/90-3/31/92
$50,000 * 1,125 hrs.
.54
68-C9-0033 / Foster-Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc.
(PO - S. Rosenthal, RREL, Edison, N.J.)
WA# 2-R044
Eval. of Hazardous Waste Remediation Technologies
(Jim Cummings - WAM) 10/1/91 - 4/1/92
$50,000 4 578 hrs.
.28
68-C8-0058 / Dynamac
(PO - John Mathews, RSKERL, Ada, Ok.)
WA # 2HQ 1
OSWER Technology Support Program
(Richard Steimle - WAM) 10/1/91-9/31/92
$50,000 * 1,000 hrs.
.48
68-CO-0083 / ICF, Inc.
(PO - Miriam Romblad, Ofc. of Water (Hq.))
WA # 0-28
Anal, and logistical support to
Fed. Remediation Rountable
(Richard Steimle - WAM) 5/6/90 - 5/30/91
$295,000 4 4,185 hrs.
2.01
TOTALS:
$1,828,441 • 32,833 hrs. 15.78
-------
-------
1AR 1 9 ;392
3
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: TIO Contract Management Program Activities
From: Walter W. Kovalick, Jr., Ph.D.
Director
Technology Innovation Office
To: Richard J. Guimond
Deputy Assistant Administrator
The purpose of this memorandum is to appraise you of the nature of the
contracts and the contracts management practices that we have in the TIO. You will
note that our staff of 20 FTE is highly leveraged in its use of extramural dollars to
provide training and to carry out technology information and analysis functions.
Presently, Thorn De Kay of my staff manages all TIO sponsored contracts.
Currently, TIO oversees a 4-year OSWER Mission Support (LOE) Contract with EMS,
Inc. and a 4-year OSWER Dedicated Training Support (LOE) Contract with PRC-EMI,
Thorn serves as Project Officer for each of these contracts; I have attached a profile
of each for your information. I have also attached a profile of a completed Mission
Support (LOE) Contract with ICF, Inc. that TIO managed. Audit histories are noted
on these profiles.
In addition, TIO staff members have accessed other agency contracts (10 over
the last year) and serve as Work Assignment Managers on these contracts. A profile
of these Work Assignments is attached.
Thorn De Kay will serve as TIO's representative on the OSWER Quality
Assurance Team (QAT).
-------
-2-
Manaoement Controls in Place:
Each potential Work Assignment Manager (WAM) must have completed
the PCMD sponsored "Contract Administration Course" and the "Project
Officer Training Course" prior to acting as a WAM for any TIO contract.
Each of the TIO contractors and their sub-contractor representatives
have been given a formal orientation/briefing by the Project Officer. At
this meeting, admonitions against doing work outside the Scope of Work
(SOW) of the contract/work assignment (which results in penalties of
non-payment for this work), the procedures for subcontractors'
participation in the contract, and basic rules for doing day-to-day
business are discussed. In addition, reporting procedures and
information to be contained in monthly activity reports and financial
reports is relayed to the contractors.
Monthly meetings are scheduled with principal parties of each of the
contracts where problem areas are discussed and resolved;
Each 'buy-in' assignment (i.e. another OSWER office staff member
serves as the principal WAM) is assigned a TIO co-Work Assignment
Manager so that each WA issued under TIO contracts is monitored.
Each request for a buy-in is accompanied by a reminder of Agency policy
concerning not directing of work to sub-contractors -- this is a firm rule
observed by TIO);
WAMs are provided monthly reports and are urged to review and report
any questions to the Project Officer;
Each Work Assignment contains the requirement that "a copy of each
deliverable is to be given to the Project Officer," so that a complete file
of contract deliverables can be maintained. (This has been important to
various audits or requests for information from Congressional staffs that
have accompanied the contracts). This requirement is also in place for
any and all correspondence related to a particular Work Assignment;
All requests for work outside the approved Work Assignment Workplans
are required to be communicated through the Project Officer to the
Contractor -- the PO either issues a formal WA amendment or a technical
directive (TD), so that a "paper trail" can be maintained for each
additional or changed requirement. Without the PO's signature/approval,
the contractor is not authorized to institute any change to the approved
SOW.
-------
-3-
Each contractor must provide the PO with a list of all monthly
expenditures of hours, Other Than Direct Costs (ODC's) ~ including
travel, copying, messenger service, etc. -- with the monthly activity
report. This list is used by the PO in approving monthly vouchers.
Vouchers are approved only by the PO, after a review of the monthly
activity reports that contain information concerning deliverables. This
policy holds true even for 'discount' vouchers where rapid turn-around
is requested by the PCMD Finance Division. If there is no monthly report
for review, there is no sign-off on the voucher -- even though discount
or reduced costs are involved.
The PO is responsible for communicating to WAMs any changes in
contract procedures/rules issued by PCMD.
The PO is responsible to answer any audit or formal inquiry concerning
TIO sponsored contracts. To date, once an interview has taken place
where TIO safeguards have been explained or demonstrated, TIO
contracts have been dropped from post-audit reports.
Management Controls to be Instituted:
Although we believe these management practices are effective, there are areas
of potential improvement that TIO is presently addressing:
• Based on needs expressed by WAMs, a 2-3 hour in-house Seminar on
estimating the hours/costs involved in issuing a WA is planned, as well
as a refresher course for all WAMs.
4 On-site contractor staff (presently 2 employees) will be removed from
TIO space in the Crystal Station facility by April 1, 1992.
Attachments
-------
-------
1 9 7-32
EPA # 68-W2-0004
OSWER Mission Support Contract
Environmental Management Support, Inc. (EMS)
Feb. 2, 1992-Jan. 31, 1996
Contract Profile
The purpose of this contract is to obtain the analytical, technical, and
management support required by various OSWER program offices. The work required
under this contract requires the contractor to prepare and conduct analytical studies
of OSWER program strategies and regulatory initiatives.
The work elements of this contract have been organized into three areas:
-- General analysis and strategic planning;
— General support for technology transfer programs, research and development,
and training support as related to Technology Transfer issues; and
-- Graphic Arts support.
The Contract statement of work is attached. There are 15 active assignments.
Contract Statistics:
Negotiated Hours
Base Year: 1/21/92 - 1/31/93; 30,000 hrs. @ $1,644,300
Op. Yr. I: 2/1/93-1/31/94; 30,000 hrs. @ $1,698,921
Op. Yr. II: 2/1/94 - 1/31/95; 30,000 hrs. @ $1,755,582
Op. Yr. Ill: 2/1/95 - 1/31/96; 30,000 hrs. @ $1,814,916
Totals: 4 years performance; 120,000 hrs. @$6,913,719
Cost -I- Fee: $5,913,723
ODC's: $ 999,996
FTE Equiv.: 14.5 per year (@2,080 man-hours)
-------
-------
EPA # 68-W2-0004
OSWER Mission Support Contract
EMS
Feb. 2, 1992 -Jan. 31, 1996
AUDIT SUMMARY:
None
PROJECT OFFICER: Thomas R. De Kay
OSWER/TIO
OS-110W
Tel. # 703/ 308-8798
Work Assignment Managers: (OSWER)
Argain, Karen (TIO)
De Kay, Thomas (TIO)
Fiedler, Linda (TIO)
Forlini, Michael (TIO)
Kingscott, John (TIO)
S. Bala Krishnan (ORD - De Kay)
Perdek, Joyce (RREL, Edison, N.J. - De Kay)
Powell, Daniel (TIO)
Smith, Naomi (TIO)
Steimle, Richard (TIO)
# # #
-------
-------
9 -32
EPA # 68-WO-0034
OSWER Dedicated Training Support Contract
Planning Research Corp. - Environmental Mangement, Inc. (PRC-EMI)
Jul. 9, 1990-Jul. 8, 1994
Contract Profile
The purpose of this contract is to provide the technical support required to
implement a systematic analysis of OSWER-related training needs and to plan, design,
develop, and deliver a national training program.
The work elements of this contract include:
- Analysis of training/workforce management needs;
-- Design, development, and delivery of training;
-- Technical support for OSWER's Technology Transfer Program, including the
SITE program, as it relates to dissemination of information; and
- Graphic support for management briefings.
The contract statement of work is attached. There have been 18 completed
work assignments, and 19 assignments are currently active (total 37).
Contract Statistics:
Negotiated hours
Base Year: 7/9/90 - 7/8/91; 27,500 hours @ $1,688,555
Op. Yr. I: 7/9/91 - 7/8/92; 27,500 hours @ $1,732,622
Op. Yr. II: 7/9/92 - 7/8/93; 27,500 hours @ $1,778,508
Op. Yr. Ill: 7/9/93 - 7/8/94; 27,500 hours @ $1,826,331
Totals: 4 years performance; 110,000 hours @ $7,026,016
Cost + Fee: $5,719,516
ODC's: $1,306,500
FTE Equiv.: 13.2 per year (@2,080 man-hours)
-------
-------
EPA # 68-WO-0034
OSWER Dedicated Training Support Contract
PRC-EMI
7/9/90 - 7/8/94
AUDIT SUMMARY
Feb. 1992 - Region III - IG Audit - Review of Superfund Contracts
PROJECT OFFICER: Thomas R. De Kay
OSWER/TIO
OS-110W
Tel. # 703/ 308-8798
Work Assignment Managers:
Argain, Karen (TIO)
De Kay, Thomas (TIO)
Fiedler, Linda (TIO)
Gray, Edward (TIO)
Latka, Mary (OERR - De Kay)
Marini, Steven (TIO)
Quander, John (TIO)
Seitz, Fred (OSW - De Kay)
Suit, Marlene (TIO
-------
-------
MAR 1 9
EPA #68-01-7481
OSWER Mission Support Contract
ICF, Inc.
(Oct. 1, 1987 - Mar. 31, 1991)
Contract Profile
The purpose of this contract was to obtain the analytical, technical, and
management services of a contractor to support various OSWER programs. The goal
of this contracting effort was to provide the AA/OSWER with support required to
analyze policy options and design appropriate systems and procedures to improve EPA
programs.
The work elements of this contract were organized into three major work areas:
Research and development, technology transfer and training support;
General policy analysis and strategic planning; and
Risk-benefit and risk assessment methodological studies.
The Contract statement of work is attached. (96 Work Assignments were
completed during the period of performance).
Contract Statistics:
Negotiated Hours
Base Year: 10/1/87 - 3/31/89 ; 72,000 hrs. @ $3,308,431
Op. Yr. I: 4/1/89 - 3/31/90; 36,000 hrs. @ $1,771,721
Op. Yr. II: 4/1/90-3/31/91; 36,000 hrs. @ $1,835,423
Totals: 3 years performance; 144,000 hrs. @$7,016,574
Invoiced Totals: 3 years performance; 107,690 hrs. @ $6,368,135
Cost + Fee: $6,008,450
ODC: $ 359,685
FTE Equiv.: 17.3 per year (@2,080 man-hours)
-------
-------
EPA #68-01-7481
OSWER Mission Support Contract
ICF, Inc.
Oct. 1, 1987 -Mar. 31, 1991
Audit Summary
1990-1992
1990:
Feb -- Cong. Inquiry (Dingell Committee) - Review of SF Contracts
May -- Reg. II - IG Audit - Review of SF Contracts
1991:
Feb - Cong. Inquiry (Dingell Committee) - Request for File copies
Jul -- Region V - IG Audit - Review of SF Contracts
Nov -- GAO Audit - Review of Contracts with "Consultant" clauses
1992:
Feb - Region III - IG Audit - Review of SF Contracts
NB:
1. The audits/Congressional Inquiries represent formal meetings where actual
copies of contract information were transferred to the interviewer by the Project
Officer. This list does not contain information about telephone inquiries from
Congressional Staff members, the EPA IG, or GAO where the contract was discussed
-- these conversations generally centered around the "consultant clause" of the
contract that was not exercised during the contract performance period.
2. Following each interview listed above, no further action was
required/requested and this contract was subsequently deleted from inquiry reports.
#
-------
-------
EPA #68-01-7481
OSWER Mission Support Contract
ICF, Inc.
Oct. 1, 1987 --Mar. 31, 1991
Project Officer:
Thomas R. De Kay
OSWER/TIO
OS-110W
Tel. # 7031 308-8798
Work Assignment Managers (OSWER)
Bahnick, Joseph
Burgan, Karen
Calvan, Rita
Chemerys, Ruth
Cruickshank, James
De Kay, Thomas
Donovan, Kevin
Ellenberger, Karen
Ferenbach, Marjorie
Fiedler, Linda
Fields, Timothy
Gleason, Lee Anne
Gray, Edward
Haley, Jennifer
Harris, Pam
Jones, Timothy
Keffer, William (Reg. 7)
Kingscott, John
Kremer, Fran (RREL Cinn.)
LaPointe, Elizabeth
McMaster, James
Marini, Steven
Meeley, Marianne
Morgan, Nick
Musgrove, Venessa
O'Leary, James
Pheiffer, Thomas
Prins, Chris
Quinn, Janet
Steimle, Richard
Suit, Marlene
Tulis, Dana
Whelan, Thomas
Wilhelm, Ronald
Yurman, Daniel
Zaragoza, Lawrence
# # #
-------
-------
Agency Contracts Utilized by TIO
(Buy-ins 1991-92)
Q '*3
Contract I/Contractor
Period of Performance
$ Amount 4 Hours
68-C8-0062 / SAIC
(PO - David Ferguson, RREL, Cinn.)
WA# 3-75
Forum on Innovative Hazardous
Waste Treatment Technologies:
Domestic and International
(Thomas De Kay -WAM) 11/18/91 - 12/30/92
$150,146 * 2000 hrs.
.96
FO8635-90-C-0380 / Delta Corporation
(IAG #DW57933881 / USAF
PO - David Graham, OCEM (Hq.))
WA# 91-2
Support for NACEPT Focus Group
(Thomas De Kay - WAM) 6/1 /90 - 9/1 /92
$185,000 * 3000 hrs.
1.44
68-WO-0032 / RTI
(PO - Norma Hughes, OSW (Hq.))
WA #11
Analytical Support for Utilization
of TSDR - RCRA Market Survey
(Michael Forlini - WAM) 3/8/91 - 10/31/92
$30,000 « 500 hrs.
.24
68-W1-0005 / Booz-Allen & Hamilton
(PO - Fran Hanavan, OERR (Hq.))
WA # F-34
Superfund Retention/Development
(procedures materials)
(Karen Argain - WAM) 3/29/91 - 7/31/92
$362,313 4 8,200 hrs.
3.94
WA # F-42
Development of a Technology Primer
(Jim Cummings - WAM) 5/9/91 - 9/30/91
$9,949 * 225 hrs.
.11
WA # F-43
Logistical Support, Fed. Remediaton Roundtable Meetings
(Dan Powell - WAM) 5/8/91 - 1-31-92
$46,661 4 1,000 hrs.
.48
-------
-2-
WA # F-44
Community Relations Project (prepare
fact sheets on Inn. Treatment Tech.s)
(Nancy Dean - WAM) 5/21/91 - 3/30/92
$64,029 * 1,450hrs.
.70
WA #F-48
Procurement Procedures Guidelines
(fact sheets on regional experiences)
(Nancy Dean - WAM) 6/17/91 - 7/30/92
WA # F-52
International Trip Report Compilation
(Thomas De Kay - WAM) 6/24/91 - 12/31/91
$55,042 * 1,200 hrs. .58
$14,375 * 300 hrs. .14
WA # F-72
Analysis of SF Site Remedies
selected in RODS (Treatment Trains)
(Linda Fiedler - WAM) 12/12/91 -7/31/92
$13,160 * 300 hrs.
.14
68-CO-0047 / PRC-EMI
(PO - Wm. Frietsch, RREL, Cinn.)
WA #0-36
Innovative Treatment Tech. Database
(Linda Fiedler - WAM) 21/1/92-12/31 /92
$350,000 * 6,150 hrs. 2.96
WA # 0-38
Semi-Annual Status Reports
(analysis of SF sites using
innovative technologies)
Linda Fiedler - WAM)
21/1/91 - 12/31/92
$62,766 * 1,000 hrs.
.48
WA # 0-39
Market Report for Innovative Treatment Technologies
(Linda Fiedler - WAM) 12/91 - 12/31/92
$20,000 * 300 hrs.
.14
68-D1-0022/TRI
(PO - Alfred Galli, ORD (Hq.))
WA # 2-4
Revision of Tech. Support Director for
RCRA Correction Action and SF Site Remed.
(Dan Powell - WAM) 8/26/91 - 3/31/92
$20,000 + 320 hrs.
.15
-------
-3-
68-WO-0036 / Roy F. Weston
(PO - Esther Williford. OSW (Hq.))
WA #TD 129011-001, A-F
Removal Applicatons Project
(ID use of innovative technologies in the SF
Emergency Response Program)
(Dan Powell - WAM) 11/90-3/31 /92
$50,000 * 1,125 hrs.
.54
68-C9-0033 / Foster-Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc.
(PO - S. Rosenthal, RREL, Edison, N.J.)
WA# 2-R044
Eval. of Hazardous Waste Remediation Technologies
(Jim Cummings - WAM) 10/1/91 - 4/1/92
$50,000 « 578 hrs.
.28
68-C8-0058 / Dynamac
(PO - John Mathews, RSKERL, Ada, Ok.)
WA # 2HQ 1
OSWER Technology Support Program
(Richard Steimle - WAM) 10/1/91 - 9/31/92
$50,000 * 1,000 hrs.
.48
68-CO-0083 / ICF. Inc.
(PO - Miriam Romblad, Ofc. of Water (Hq.))
WA # 0-28
Anal, and logistical support to
Fed. Remediation Rountable
(Richard Steimle - WAM) 5/6/90 - 5/30/91
$295,000 4 4,185 hrs.
2.01
TOTALS:
$1.828,441 * 32,833 hrs. 15.78
-------
-------
v.^ 11 Tracking System (MATS) Rage :
:ailed Audit Report
;C PROGRAM Date s 09/24/90
Peqion/HQ Oftice : GSWER/AA/OERR
Action Q-fricial : JIM MAA3
Phone Number : (202) 260-943?
WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Federal
Quest:. oned
Disal low
0 :
o' r
!VE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS AGAINST
3PCC REGULATIONS. WITHOUT ANY TYRE OF
IOIQN3
INSPECTIONS PERFORMED B
WERE MORE SUCCESSFUL.
4 WERE OF
_ "ZNrATION TO TRANSFER FROM THE OFFICE OF
ZKJ^ rsFONSIBILITIES DEALING WITH THE SPCC
!TE TY ADM!N1STRATQR.. WE HAVE NOT
-------
Date : 10/28/91 Management Audit Tracking System
Detailed Audit Report
Non Financial Comments
(MATS)
•'age
RECOMMENDATION: THE AA/OSWER PROVIDE OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE THAT EACH
REGION PERFORMS ADEQUATE ENFORCEMENT WHEN INSPECTIONS DISCLOSE
VIOLATIONS AND ^CLLOW THROUGH TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE ACTION IS TAKEN TO
CORRECT DEFICIENCIES.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS:
COMPLETED- 11/90 SENT RECOMMENDATION TO PLACE ENFORCEMENT
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR 3PCC PROGRAM AND RELATED PROGRAMS UNDER THE OIL
POLLUTION ACT
FA) OF 19°0 IN OSWER.
3/28/91-PREFARE MEMO TO EACH EPA REGION REQUESTING THEM TO TURN OVER
INSPECTION REPORTS OF SPCC VIOLATIONS TO THE APPROPRIATE OFFICE FOR-
ENFORCEMENT ACTION. Completed 10/01/91. "" "
05/15/91 -DEVELOP INTERIM GUIDANCE FOR HANDLING SPCC VIOLATIONS' UNTIL, '' *
FINAL GUIDANCE IS DEVELOPED, ... - -
"•..-W*
07/31/92-FINAL SPCC •< PHASE I) REGULATIONS PROMULGATED.* ~,' . \ " ' f * A.
.,.. : :.:' •• ' , »•!'.-
06/30/92-SPCC REGULATORY WORKGROUP BEGINS WORK ,ONI ENFORCEMENT GUIDANCE
FCR REGIONAL SPCC INSPECTORS. ' • .... ;- •
1 ~> / •* r^ / O T» Q C' P <"•
J. -t- i J. J_ / 7 jL. \w I W '—J
PROGRAM
CEMENT GUIDANCE DISTRIBUTED TO REGIONAL SPCC-
'••
• ^'.I:
>•'-*'•
. -_
SPCC% :'
RECOMMENDATION: AA/OSWER DETERMINE IF THE RESOURCES ALLQCfcTEft.TO EACH.
REGION FOR PERFORMING SPCC INSPECTIONS ARE ADEQUATE. THIS
ENSURE THAT EACH REGION HAS ENOUGH RESOURCES NOT ONLY Tf
INSPECTIONS, BUT ALSO THE NECESSARY FOLLOW-UP AND ENFORCEM^N^ ','If THE t"
CURRENCT RESOURCES ARE DETERMINED TO BE ADEQUATE*' EMPHASl^Erto TWln••'.,/
REGIONS THE NECESSITY FOR OPERATING A-COMPLETE INSPECTK
INCLUDES ADEQUATE FOLLOW-UP AND EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT.,. ''^ 3-'>^"^ ' ' \
CORRECTIVE ACTION:
COMPLETED- FY 92 BUDGET SUBMISSION SENT TO THE OFFICE OP1'MANAGEMENT
AND BUDGET WITH PROVISION FOR ADDITIONAL SPCC RESOURCES." *•-'.' ,
BEE MILESTONES FOR.- RECOMMENDATIONS 1 AND 3, *
-------
::,iL-4TH qUAR'EF.3 -VQI .; INC
:~""~GRKANCE GF INSPECTION
CMC CONCERNING ~~-
S.-'-E" JLEC ""--<- CL;G:-
T T :
r o c ~ r^;
-------
-------
•"anagernen t Audit Tracking system (MATS)
Detailed Audit Report -"
Page :
-4 ; 0400027 ~itla : CONTROLS OVER OVERTIME. Date : 08/07/90
r-:a b Decision Proposed : Region/HQ Office : AA/03WER/OERR
"Igt Decision Actual : 11/08/90
Action Official : JIM MAAS
Final Action Date : 08/20/91 Phone Number : (202) 260-9439
Audit is greater than 130 days past GIG Issuance, And Not Closed
DIG Information
•„ Office : DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF EMERGENCY AND REMEDIAL RESPONSE
Assignment tt :E13HF9-11-003?
Brant # i
'ios-ed Date
11/26/90
Better Use Neccmmend :
Better Use Agreed :
Ineligible
Unsupported
Unnec/Unres
Federal
Questioned
0
O
0
Federal
Disal lowed
CMJ
of
CM
_; i u oummary
OVERTIME CONTROLS WERE WEAK OR NON-EXISTENT IN THE SIX OFFICES
REVIEWED, AND OFFICES VIOLATED EPA POLICY BY USING OVERTIME CONTINUOUSLY.
"HE POTENTIAL FOR-ERRONEOUS SALARY PAYMENTS WAS INCREASED, AND AN ENVIRON-
MENT WAS CREATED .3WH ICH FRAUD AND WASTE WERE MORE LIKELY TO OCCUR.
-------
r-TAT'3
•-v-'7 R,•••=?•!
-'J...'P Eata i 09/24/
Of^icie : AA/DSUER--'UWPE
;ic.;. al : SUSAN BROMM
tpr : (202) 2cO-4SOS
n T <~;
-------
-t Audit Tracking bystem (MAT;
Detailed Audit Report
.ID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Federal
Quest ioned
Tn eligible
Unsupported
Unnac/Unres
deral
lowed
o
CL:._CWL:F REVIEW -OUND THAT
:iN2 CGST RECOVERY ACTIONS
CMISED IN CL'F SEPTEMBER 1
EPA WAS STILL NOT AGGRESSIVELY
NCR HAD IT IMPLEMENTED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
P& REPORT -
::RRECTIVE ACTIONS FOR" THIS AUDIT HAVE ALREADY BEEN ACTED ON? FINAL
5E COMPLETED UNTIL THE THE PILOT PROJECTS ARE COMPLETED
3. 5 AND 9. THESE PRCJECTS ARE EXPECTED TO BE COMPLETED IN
-------
r ,
- l .<
; - , '
i.'- '" ! fj f
,,' ,,, l' "
-"
I'j M . it z
fji UJ _J IL! U >-•!
(0 u n ;••> o
>-< >- z: rn uj ir
f.r' ci, LI! u.i 7-i rn o
! ' ' i r *
i i _, M L LI
- HI u i M
f- Li! f J
ii '1.1 l iJ{
l.!|
111 \~
n vr rn
:. vi !• uj
ID
l -• r r i c~
U. IX f- UJ •
|j| n >--> u: ::n
. ' ii: \ (••••
:.-;. iu rn _j
(n i- ..j 1-1 ;:;i
>••< f!. i:.: (n
:.;: >~: uj
Q LI c.i LU rr
--:'- f-j T!
CC L! ! •• '!-:;'
D fr: n
C| 11 "1 „- .•.-!
Ui (LI i!.. n ! •
i.'i v" MI •- n -
'1 '' "";' l.'i . I'.l.
•: ' '•'• i i.V.i
' : . '!. f ! ! l.... '
<.-'! in IM jv
'• '• ' Q i-- a:
i ''; i • * •. l ; "r
a:
a
u.
~r?i
Ji
li.
H
L:I
iu
f.;.
n
u:
tj ..
K-
n
j
h— i
Lj_
.:»
( j
UJ
....!
K-
j. ..
UJ
O
%••
ill
_.J
i- i
a.
UI
...i...
»•• i-- >-
0"
c-? ll . Uj
O (II ">
H- n
in z in
o -i iij
n tn it
hi \~ UJ
> H
i..H iti 1 ,:T
U .1 '•;!
LL r: D LU
»-! i
£ ft x
r l!l
rn s:. >-
h- ' •'• Ijj . r i >-<
a. fr.. rn
o K. ui
H- U t: l£
l"l IV" i "!
. .! ill •••. ;>••
V1 f1.. LU it
K-
fJJ
n
tj
ll!
i •
o:
f;'r
ii..
o:i
Ui
T-T
-r
.. u..
i ! '
~?
rii
r-H
ro
IX
\Y_
I.J
Cl
1 1
_J
I..I
- ! :' : I
I I
I I
•..: in n •,;•• i
i I' 1 !- 1 :
i 'Z. !..ll r.- !:•••
ri !'i: ;,:: ;••
i i-t i i .,-1
i: in r - r i
UJ 01 ! !:'
'! IL VI l. J U.J
i IV) (h !•••
j
tn !i
I Ui
i u.; >•
•! R: u!
-------
2ND QUARTER:- OWPE WILL INITIATE A PROCESS T3
AND RELATIVE PER-ORMANCE OF THE MANAGEMENT AN:
f '" RECOVERY PROGRAMS IN THE REGIONS,
10/01/7'1-QWPE WILL IS3UE THE RESULTS OF THIS CCS" RECOVER- "NG!
ASSESSMENT.
NOTE 4: OIG BELIEVES THAT A SYSTEM IS NEEDED TO CENT"AL,_\ "."R:--.;
BANKRUPTCY CASES. A SYSTEM THAT TRACKS THESE GASES AND CCKP-IS'
MONITORING WI:_L RESULT. IN AN OVERAuL BETTER MANAGED FR'OERA"s
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS;
6/30/9i-QWPE PLANS "1C DEVELOP' A SPECIALIZED BAN,:RU::'TC'V REPORT .
THE CERCLIS AND CRCR DATA BASE AND DISTRIBUTE IT TO THE RESIGN!
NOTE 5: IN CUR OPINION, 03WER HAS DELAYED 'HIS ISSUE
REPORT. BOTH REGIONS 3 AND 4 IN THIS REVIEK' STATED THAT ~,- : S
WOULD IMPROVE ERA'S EMPHASIS FOR F RF ' S, *E E'ELIEVE THIS. ,-AN3;
WOU^.D PUT ON RECORD THAT ERA EHJUL.D BE ir.:"GRMEI IF A PR- BOSS
BANKRUPTCY.
ORRECTIVE ACTION;
COMPLETE-ID 3/21 /9l -DUPE HAS nDD-ESEEL YOJR CG^rEN" RE
INCORPORATIDN 0- OP-ICIAL LRRDITOF. LANGUAGE INTO THE
DEMAND POR RECOVER-,' C;r COSTS INCURRED UNDER CEPlT.h- S •- Ai-Ei-^DING
BUI DANCE TO REQUIRE WRITTEN DE-AiMDS TO r--3L.UDE L.ANSU-- GE AS F0._!
! "EGTION IN THE BANKRUPTCY C3U^~, EPA RESERVE
EXPENSES AGAINS" THE BANK^jFT'S ESTATE.-
ic .
EACH REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR, AND, IN THE TRANSMITTAL. RECUES"
INTERNA^ CONTROL REk'l-UJ BASED ON THE RESULTS OF OUR REPORT AND
:AL 1°91 FEDERAL MANAGERS'
THIS ISSUE IN THEIR P
ACT ASSURANCE LETTER.
CORRECTIVE ACTION:
QSWER WILL DISTRIBUTE THE FINAL SUBJECT REPOF"-" TC REGIONAL.
ADMINISTRATORS FOLLOW INS ISSUANCE BY THE OIG, 'HE DISTRIEU'
WILL REQUES"T THAT IN PY 1991, EACH
-THE OIG REPORT AND ADDRESS THIS ISSUE IN THE I-' FEDE.RH... MAN\3Er' =
FINANCIA^ INTEGRITY AST ASSURANCE LETTER.
NOTE 7: THE OIG BELIEVES THAT THE INITIATIVES ~A-E:\ RY OS,-,I-
RESPONSE TO THE ADMINISTRATOR'S SUPER-UND MA:-AEEMENT RE-.'IEv. AR!
START TOWARDS REDUCING NEGOTIATIONS ~':. ilEFRA: ,ES. .--../.E,-EH, TO
CONSISTENTLY COMPLETE !4EGOT IATIQNS UJITHIN ~;YS 7 I^EFRAMG.!. WE I: i
-. OSWER NEEDS TO DETERMINE THE REASONS F.IR r^CT TI^3_/v ZI-^L^~1^:
•NEGOTIATIONS. FURTHERMORE, THE IN:." I A'"I VEc. NC TEL L. OSWE- r-RE
M THREE YEARS AFTER Oi_F. GRIG
.DLINES.
8: THE
-------
-------
•• '--~c.r ing bystem (MATS)
age :
T i : I a
R5 Data ; C?/23/^0
: QSWER/AA/QERR
Action Official : JIM MAAS
Phone Numbar : (202) 260-0489
••'•5 Past C13/Managemsnt Agreement Dsts
:RSENCV REEFOMS;
Federal
Quest ion-3d
'Jr supported
Unnec/Unres
Faderal
D i sa 1 I owed
0
o
'.0'
DISPOSING OF WASTES
•-AT RE-ATES IN DETAIL, THE GUIDANCE
REQUIREMENTS, BUT WE HAVE NOT
ELINES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE
1-
-------
'XI I-JJ D
Hi iTj * -
cr ct- O
.1 tt Ml
i'D rj) lj.i
"Ti "S ft
t:: c \j
1)1 Hi !J.i
fii rn CT
ill
T:I -ii
iU I'D
' i n
rn n
m 3 •":•
tl 3 -I)
ni
3 CJ
CL O
•-..
.. ,, ,.y
f •-
O i' 'i
c: c -<
D D n
D tn in
ID E !--•
n ~3 M.
X Tl ill
C" O M.
3 -; fir
1 ft I-"
nj ra m
Ul D.
i
o o o
o o o
G) '!.:• TJ
-; ii; n
in in .;t
::i >-•
'-r til
D n
-i-p 3 -ii
iu h
:n !-•
.:•!• n
.'LI
'#
uu ml
I'll I-
H* til
oi cn
c.) t-i
n 01
O H
i •
C'--
-fc X>
i r-i
O 3
4-- .-H
C > 2'
-••J
;-|
O
.j".
rn
a
p
H'.
O
.-
x>
01
-H
in
I';.
7'
O
m
"S
rn
JO T| Tl
C ID uj
to a. m
Ul ID Z
•rt -5 n
i-1- ill -C
o >--
3 Ti
in ni
a. cn
TI
o
7?
01
rn
0 T|
i-1- m
ui a.
in so
t—1 "5
>-> -•' O cj ft. •
1 "i i'D .LI
I -K :r> n n n
| O 11 M. r...
! "'. ft m in •«
1 3 .... !.-.. ..-..
i !)' u o a '--
i .-i- :j ::i :j !-•••
i i-' •">
1 0 ID 1- "n 0
1 ..'J i\> n ••; i~-
..-i- .-!- i"i tn
:a '-; "TJ oi
rit t-;
H- i.n
iii
El ••!
1 '•
ae 1.U .d ,-f
I- '
O II)
".J
••
^l' -y.
d
J 01
^ H
j
i j'l
:i>
TI
x=
TJ I:. TJ
:r n I'D TJ
tl n- ii-) TJ
J M. M.
ra 0 o CD
D n H
z x :i>
C O T T)
3 -H El - i
cr -t.
ID i-- O 3
-; ri -t, x>
H.. .fl 2
ill - CJ
s-- n j>
rti H
m
*• «u • •
.... ?~ o CT
-•~i rn t.n TJ
o z s:
i.-j z ni
•- m ;n
H x 0
i.J, X O &
•"•• m *.t
CO TJ TJ fD
I -< TJ
CD m
CJ 7.1 I
-0 01 01 O
'.•i ,0 CJ
tr* x
p j
^*
'•v
-0
1— ••
•£• J, +•
••.. rn o
L •••) n i i'i
:;'";, •"' ; p-
" -• p J>
-o <.: •<
h--L r- -i
.i -j;r . . t
01 Z
n ; ^
i •-, , i •
...... ,T|
]> !":;
p i-i
0 u i
i""l
i'(" .Tl
; ! f.7
1 .._..;
-< u
i>
i~i ";r
cn n
i.0 rn
c.
rn r:)
ui c:
" i n
i'i H
i""- i "1
:n
;n -J
ni :i:
2: rn
H
rn
-'11 Tl
r i'
:t>
z n
Z "n
m "n
t.l n
n
O 10
3>
H 0
rn -n
TI Q
o rn
Tl Z
m
n ::ii
a 3>
2 r"
Ti
r~ n
rn a
H C
o oi
z m
r
n
01
ij :." j.) \ -i 'ii ni .- ';; •
';ri i i] i i X1 T i'i i " i i pi i. !
o [."! t"i :;••: rn ::;i ^ •' ' ...- '.-.
••'•• t.: a i r.: ,..;
c i""" TJ :i'. z i-i i:, .p n i n i. ., r •)
t ) i-' U ••••< .!> Z 2: :z ( .1 I-H p ri
- - j — i j : | j .- j— j .. . j j • -i i: - - ,.•
f-i :' ! Z T-' I-H IT'i r"l |Vj rj ;•? '... :'i
c.) CJ t'l D o in 'TI in m .= ' p
;::'' ~:' in i" .,::-: • i m sin hi
01 0 1 "i "i :/ i • -i 7r i — i " n i i i- ' 4
s~ rn r cn !•"< p ' ' ':;;:i '.r. p-i
"D1 "n i -i iiirJ "1> ":"' !':••• . i i r i
;;:r rn H i n - -i ij'i -ri ... j. .;;.
CJ P T i"l !-l ' ' ("J J'' ~i" :
. -•*•• •' - ' .' '..: . .!. . J - i
J.-1 -'-I ";:" i"j '~' ("1 •' ' |"P I'j i'
\' H Z T -H "" jii ':::'' " ' !'• i 1:7J
''> n 11 '!•• - i " •;•' iri n i-i ~T ' '
(I) Z 'Li "-I ,:-. t) i::"'f i:'-l in ':n "n ";.
'"il ''Vi i"' '' '' •"! • "I "''
•J.' i 1.' 1 i i.i., | ; j ^ii I. ^
J.J ,ii ...l.i ji. "J'l '11 J | • -;i iii
D -H rn hi :,-: •.-•, -:ii fn -i :-i m
n o .!;! p n .r i-i ci ' Si! :::,
o c: u -< irj ,." -V; -n , , ; .;
c: :i: . . -i r-i -.^ >.< ,-:- ' ,._H
z i> :-. n TI " n ... j -.>- ^ . --,
-1 M f'i'l Ij) i " >"' >-i T- :i:;; i 1 -r' .'"".
m X. Z I... "i;. :z ri'i fr- r, fn ni
o >i ni n ;r 1. 1. i iji 7' ' ;]-j
O Z .i::!! a -^ "T'j "Tl i' i j i"| '.. -
"Ti CM -H nj (,) o i":i ii-, rn f;
O C (ij fl r' i f- . '-- '~
:r, tj) • h'l .- i-..< j- ,. i ,-i
"1 ^H !.:.! LJ ri T' 'Ji
-J i> a in i: ••< r-i IP
G -1 >•< JI f" *••< f'
O) ^ "i I"" ' .~i ".-•'' "it -n i-j
, _r - " J — -I.- . '.' I — 1
-H 1> j -i "" - ITj •;•• |-i i '-
01 01 ' :..< m o rJ i-"
O -1 Gl X;' U) J, ;?
'Tj f i i "Tl J ~r -:i- i . •, 1' ^j ...
— •' - -i — ...; .1 .... II
x> I-H :u 'n n r " -fi
-i :i ::n u o u I-H ri
.X 1> H X' I'l'l Tl Tl 11 -n ...j
m Z Z 3T C) if:'' r
T'' n I'M IT] 1-1 !-< ;..- (^ rn
rn ITI z rn 7T -5 -^ rt ~r
TI m <• -H TI ~i ni ;-j , i
-n z a -.1 r cn • m 'n
o rn p cj n m .« -n T:,
-n -,"' <- TI -T •- -•-' .-:
H ^ n _, m o £ -H
u) -i jj z rn p
-i x> i> o -i £ , -,
o z :? z I'M n rn -n p
o i> x, o 2 S ," [:,
a z m TJ (jj - [-- i--,
ij l * -< ^ n n ,'i ->"-,
H "H Z 1> H i'::' m ~>
HI 01 O OM 7f T ii ^ n
i^ n rn hi '"".' m
TI n rn n • T>
Tl U GM --) '-^'
rn :-.. c f~, ,--,
:o E M ,r '
rn n n tD m
Z Z -H TJ
H r '."'
n
rn
• ''».'. • i j •
*
1 1 : !- ' I j '.: i i | : '..••' t "
i.""! "';.; .:iL lO ; i hi 'l O Us
! ; " ! f "Tl i ;| '"" i i ' "i
• -I-I \ t - :"•" i ': .f . '; ' ,-, -
rn i , "•••, "V -" • -.1 i -TI
1 ! i • * .' • ..-J. : . . '.'~ 1 '1
'. .' ' .! '..i .1 II J t r"" "•
i ..;'• i -i IT) t;.i i'''i i . "•
'•:.: P i.i U ,. i fi i n i.;,
j : i i ~y T -, j-'--i . ; ; • •. "
II i • i . . ,.t • '-....' .;-'iii
t;.l -H I,, i i ;•• \}
.1, I..H ; ,-; j 11, ,;0
'. '• '-•- 1 ' 1 L J i 1 !. ! I t
,...! ^J n;, :r '•'' ;i': I , , ..i1
t-.i !' ' i i 1:1
--". ' ' -• "-'-'- O 1 3
oi ni m 013
" l.'l I'll Mi :".n I Hi
i '"• • i ::-' -^ r- 1 i --. -T
.- • - •'.,... j^._ 1. F | ... ! •£
i t'1 CO ••:" 1 ti ii
'...: ""! ''• • : '• 1 '.'1 -~1
' ' '•- ! •!•• . ' ' t..j ff:
i"- ._. ,. H'l r", i a
1 i i 1 i . V Hi
i. • J ! 1 h i 1 • ; :• 3
i i --I i : rB
P O ill ill 3
tl .'H i:.i O ct
£ "f> i i : in
£•; '"' :l'"' i:t V
"H '. 1 i - 1 iji C
T. c..: in hi i- n
m :s i • >-- M.
•"' n in ct
'n -- i < a
»••••• c:i ,ii rn -H
Z hi '3.! X> 3
:.t:. -H ,-- in r m
i n_. rn *•* u n
i ' I .1 :! I J.i r- "T
C;j iji "1" ci- H-
C 'J) IT'I • ) ri
i-i ii'j • jii ID
':.' iii :i;= ni
i± -,1 •-•'• '!•' u)
i..'! ! 1 '/ ^ II' ':.'
t") --:: -5 ui
01 f.:l i ft fh
i— i iii
.o T:' ";r 3
01 ,z in
Ci p
•''"•- - •'..
ni n :s
r~ i--i :ii T)
i ••{ rn \
01
:tv n ..
01 U Hi
.-, ,...
a H
i A'- i i
:.L :i> m
iii n
:u -H i
C) T
TJ rn
01 TJ
OJ
iD
0)
" >i
-J
-------
10/23/91
Z-A'3 CCT.
Management Audit Tracking System (MATS)
D s"; ails d A u. d 11 Rep c r t
POST-SARA REMEDIAL ACTION REPORT ~C CONGRESS
UNRELIABLE A: DID MC1" COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF
RELATED CONGRESSIONAL INTE^T-
-------
(MATS.
10"
,;D REMEDIAL ACT I CM;
A" I ON "ii\D f-A - E ALREADY
UiHANZE T"£ THE SUPERFUND
E -'G I' :•. 7- I'lT . - THE MANUAL
FT ML" Ai E'-'ENTS. THESE
:TCPITTE£ LIST SITES ARE
•"STEM CERCLISi.' EVENT
'EAR TO 'EAP TO MAKE CERCLI!
CF FURT-ER DESCRIBING
ST^f-'TS, ANOTHER SUB-EVENT
RT " THE F/ !PQI pRnGF.A-vi
"RA CONTRACT AWARD"
--T fiF . SITES' ' WHICH IS
THROUGH THIS SUB-EVENT,
GGTIUNNAIRES DESCRIBED LATE
f T 13 !-"~T pop THE 200 RA
MEGANUrl
PC
"0 RESIGNS WITH SPECIFIC 200 RA
IS BASED ON LESSONS LEARNED FROM
GIG REGUE3T WE ADDED
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON 9/24/91.
G-EGTlGNNnlRE HAS Ai_SO BEEN PREPARED WHICH WILL SOON BE SENT TO THE
FY, AND RE~UPN FOR EACH SITE BEING TRACKED
HE GIG RA SMARTS MANDA'E. AMONG THE QUESTIONS INCLUDED IN THE
NAIr:E IS "WHEN DID THE CONTRACTOR START ON-SITE WORK'"'" THIS
NI_L. ENSURE THAT, IN ADDITION TD A CONTRACT AWARD, THE
WGF:-. HAS ACTUAi_LY STARTED IN CGNFORMAriCE WITH CONGRESSIONAL
REGIONAL 3TAFFS, ESPECIALLY RPMS, OF THE SPECIFIC SITE
ACTIVITIES Ti--.AT CONSTITUTE AN RA AND THE DEFINITIVE CRITERIA FOR
IDENTIFYING FUTURE POST-SARA RA STARTS,
WC.PE PR;'
"TUP PH! ;
SPONSEi WE ACCEPT THIS RECOMMENDATION AND HAVE ALREADY
D ACTION. GUIDANCE ON THE 200 PA STARTS AND CANDIDATE LISTS
VIDED ~0 THE REGIONS IN NOVEMBER . 19vQ, AND ACTIVITIES TO TRACK
IGA'-E EITE5 ARE IN PLACE, THE "SUPERFUND DESIGN AND
TION UPDATE" G" APRIL 1991, WHICH IS DISTRIBUTED TO RPMS,
AN AR'l luLE ENTITLED,: "THE SARA 200 UPDATE." ADDITIONALLY,
OWING ACTIVITY IS PLANNED.
7/91 FCL.LCW-UP MEMORANDUM TO REGICNS WITH SPECIFIC 200 RA
"' """"• ":~' iprrc; p.aprn n ipv LEARNED FROM
-------
175 RA STARTS'." """
RECOMMENDATION 1C.
REVIEW SITE RECORDS FDR THE 91 SITES, INCLUDING IN THE 178 RA STARTS,
SHOWN IN THE 1936 NPL LISTING AS HAVING ^'RE-SARA ACTIONS COMPLETED TO
DETERMINE WHETHER POST-SARA ACTIONS REPORTED WERE. FIRST RA STARTS FOR
THESE SITES.
THE
REGIONS IN
EBRUARV
I ••'£?% Ai\D
E, 3. ' REMOVA
ES-'GNSE: WE ACCEPT THIS RECOMMENDATION AND HAVE ALREADY
E: THE ACTION. ACTIONS INCLUDED: ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS IN
INFIRMATION QUESTIONNAIRES DISTRIBUTED TO T
91. THE QUESTIONS WERE: (1) "WAS THIS THE FIRST RA AT THE
(2) "WAS OTHER WORK PERFORMED AT THE EITE PRIOR TO THE RA
C"TIGN OR A VOLUNTARY ACTION BY AN RP)?", AND REVIEW OF
EN"" AND ACTIVITY SUMMARY REPORT FOP NPL SITES DATED
j_, , _
OUGH
-OLIO/ DURING
AND ENFORCEMENT
INCLUDED IN 'HE
OBTAINED, THE R
HE REVIEW, WE IDENTIFIED SEVEN INSTANCES OF PRE-SARA WORK
FPP3 BUT NOT AUTHORIZED BY THE PROGRAM AT THAT TIME. EPA
THE REPORTING PERIOD REQUIRED A RECORD OF DECISION (rod)
DOCUMENT FOR ALL PRP-LEAD REMEDIAL ACTIONS THAT WE'RE
REPORT. WHEN THE ROD AND ENFORCEMENT DOCUMENTS WERE
START WAS CONSIDERED SANCTIONED, AND THE RA CONTRACT
AS THE ROD SIGNATURE DATE. WE STAND BEHIND
INSTANCES ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN THE "REMARKS"
AND
i iLKhU
THESE
!ENT B.
THA'
WERE I
IR"~ WAS
'HE FAG'
JTI N
-iERF
D WERE INSTANCES OF INITIAL REMEDIAL MEASURES (I
D IN THE EARLY 1980'5. WHEN THE OCTOBER 17, 1939
D, ALL IRMS WERE CONSIDERED REMOVAL ACTIONS BECAUSE
RMS WERE CONVERTED TO REMOVAL WORK WITH THE 1985
CY "LAN. IN RESEARCHING THE IRMS, WE FOUND TWELVE
ERE, BECAUSE
STATE COST SHARE
A ROD OR OTHER
CCW"
't I AC
OR WE
I IRMS APPEARED REMEDIAL IN NATURE. THESE INSTANCES
••> THE "REMARKS" SECTION OF ATTACHMENT B. THE IRMS
) FIRST RA STARTS, HOWEVER, BECAUSE THE WORK WOULD
< POST-SARA RA START CRITERIA OF "SUBSTANTIAL AND -
DID NOT HAVE THE ROD OR ENFORCEMENT DOCUMENTS
RECOMMENDATION ID. REVIEW THE 178 RA STARTS REPORTED TO CONGRESS IN
OCTOBER 1939 TO ENSURE THAT ACTIONS REPORTED CLEARLY MET SARA
REQUIREMENTS AND CONGRESS IONALX INTENT. DELETE ANY SITES WHERE
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS WERE NOT*MET.
*
OSWER RESPONSE -. -
WE ACCEPT THIS RECOMMENDATION AND HAVE ALREADY COMPLETED THE
ACTION. ANOTHERP'QUESTIONNAIRE WAS PREPARED AND DISTRIBUTED TO REGIONAL
3UPERFUND DIVISION DIRECTORS ON FEBRUARY 14, 1991. THESE
QUESTIONNAIRES WERE RETURNED AND EXTENSIVELY ANALYZED BY THE OFFICE OF
EMERGENCY AND REMEDIAL RESPONSE (OERR) STAFF. THE ANALYSIS" SHOWED
THAT FIVE REMEDIAL ACTION STARTS WERE INAPPROPRIATELY INCLUDED IN THE
OCTOBER 17, 1939 REPORT TO CONGRESS BASED ON THE CRITERIA WE
ESTABLISHED IN DECEMBER 1987. • \ . ,- .:
IN OUR REVIEW, WE ALSO FOUND'- THAT SOME RA STARTS DID NOT PROCEED
IN A TIMELY MANNER OR TO THE EXTENT THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PLANNED.
-;PSE PROBLEMS OCCURRED AFTER THE DEADLINE, HOWEVER, AND WERE NOT
.TICIPATED WHEN THE REPORT TO CONGRESS WAS DISTRIBUTED. THE DIB ALSO
UITED SOME OF THESE PROBLEMS IN THEIR AUDIT; HOWEVER, THE R$ STARTS
WERE APPROPRIATELY INCLUDED" IN THE OCTOBER 17, 19896 REPORT^ ..... ;M :
WHEN THE OCTOPFR 17 "'
1 QOO CMrc.nt.-r
<-< r-.--.~
-------
D OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE T
SINNING ON-SITE WORK. FOR THOSE CONTRACTS AWARDED IN THE
LAST FEW MONTHS OF THE REPORTING °ERTOD, HOWEVER, T"HE WINTER LEATHER
CAUSED FURTHER DELAYS., UP TO 31;' -^ONTHS. IN ^DUP INSTANCES, WORK WAS
DELAYED SE'-'QND SIX MONTHS, AND T-fE3E INSTANCES ARE HIR-HLI GHT^, TN THF
COLUMN OF "rHD JUNE 1"! "IMAL -""A"1'1 ° -vcr;-HPT
IN FCDrt GTHEP "N::~'~-NT."-
PEF'jR T w- '-'-HDUCED , ;~"jj;~;-
CONTRACT!", AND THE POL-OW-CN CC
-RAME GR.:5INALLV EIN^ISiONED JR
; DI "j NOT Fr;CCEEr IM ^HE TIME
r~'~(~ n:~ WnPk- !..IT T'-l T r,j -r;.,p n^hjTPflr —
-.._• ... i ;__ •._• t s j •—•!-.!•. • v j. . . ,1. i -! i : ,_, ,—,. i -j ; ~.. rn Lw :
•'CGNMENCEMEN
Pi -r— TMF
RECOMMENDATION WITH THE FOLLOWING ALTERNATE
W UPDATED AND FINAL REPORT, "COMMENCEMENT OF
TO CORRECT tr-wQpg TIXJ JHE FIRST REPORT AND
ENSURE THAT FUTURE
A!"E hE.-'ORTED ACCURATELY AND RELIABLY.
GSWER RESPONSE
A REMEDIAL. DE^
COORDINATORS CANNi.
RECOMMENDATION AND HAVE ALREADY INITIATED ACTICN.
REFINED AND EXPANDED IN PREPARATION FOR
.... ,T. ... T .!/_•• |-- p. •--• f_ j rj •"?:';,". !?v.."--. CO T £*• "• T" C'
!DN 'RD) TRACKING SYSTEM HAD BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR
- COORDINATORS TO KEEP TRACK OF PROJECT STA-T'JS. THE
E R r A U E b v1.' I : ',"• ~._-.— R D L I S _' A T A , AND T r. E r! ™ id I U N A L
Uvc!"vR I L ji : f: J. ~ L!riTA. W"tEN CE.~:L'LIb DAFA ChiANidEb , ^T"1.'—
ON THE TRACKING SYSTEM. SINCE 200 PA 3TAR"r3
1 'l~ - ''' ; ."""" - ; .-•( :— : i :-••.--' T"1' I ', ~: f—i "".' f" ! ~! . i • i'-1 i-^ :
OMF'LE~E
-------
MILESTONES FCR IMFLEMENTATIOr
ISTIONNAIRE3 UilTHIN
AIRES TO THE REGIONS.
E3"IONNAIRE3 WITH CERTIFICATIDN3.
;,r;E HAVE FUSIONS RE3UBMIT AN
II t-' I ~"'~l f- ROE LEM3 FDUND.
ICUTROL3 AND RETENTION
1J!^'_ -E'vE^.3 FOR DOCUMENTATION
DI"" I'NAL 21"" POST-SARA REMEDIAL
N = CERTIFICATION QUESTIONNAIRES
ON 3E. WILL BE RETAINED IN ERA HEADQUARTERS
iKS. ADDITIONALLY, HEADQUARTERS WILL ADVISE THE REGIONS TO
:~E SET OF QUESTIONNAIRES IN THEIR CENTRAL FILES AS WELL
INDIVIDUAL. O.UE5TIOMNAIRE3 WITH THE SITE FILES. THESE
XIL- 3E DELINEATED IN THE UPCOMING 'MEMORANDUM CLARIFYING
FOLLDUi-UP MEMORANDUM TO REGIONS WITH SPECIFIC 200 RA
AND REFINED PROCEDURES BASED ON LESSONS LEARNED FROM
:EIItV1ENDATICN 3D. RECONCILE DIFFERENCES IN POST-SARA RA DATES
REPORTED TO CONGRESS AND THOSE CONTAINED IN CERCLI3. ANY SITE WITH AN
ACTUAL FRE-SARA RA DATE OR NO LEGITIMATE RA START WITHIN THE POST-SARA
:,E-:ORTIN3 PERIOD SHOULD 3E DELETED FROM THE POST-SARA ACCOMPLISHMENT
•E.-IiRT,
:3WER RESPONS
THIS RECOMMENDATION AND HAVE ALREADY INITIATED ACTION.
A HEADQUARTERS, HAZARDOUS SITE CONTROL DIVISION, MEMORANDUM WAS
"C THE REGIONAL INFORMATION MANAGEMENT COORDINATORS WITH COPIES
THE MEMORANDUM IDENTIFIED FORTY--OUR
'.RMATIQN QUESTIONNAIRES AND THE
CEP.-S_;» !'HA CONTRACT AUJAPD" FIELD. AS OF THE 6/7/91 CERCLI3 UPDATE,
TWELVE DISCREPANCIES REMAIN TO BE CORRECTED.
-------
-------
I- I
a i
n
••. n m
r -;r t .
" " 10
U". 'i. !
ill I"!'" I. •' i
•' Lii ::i -i:
'i'i ("i ir n
Cr- i J v .j" >:r
•~ UJ O O
CJ i
U! til I
XI 111 I
ni •_; i
l.L (J I
xi in
ill n.i QJ
...J 4', '; .
!' ! 'j ["
-< 0 "5
in i '•-..
111
i )
Ui
t j
o *
11 "
-------
pa •"•* ,^1 j i— j =
-- '— ' ": —I LJ .1.
"ate : 1O/28/91 Management Audit Tracking System (MATS)
NH3t Decision P-op*ed :
'-ct D-;: is ion Acituaj : C'3/27 '3
^r: .
Page
Pegion/HQ Cities : AA/OSWER/OBW
Action Ct-ficial : ERIC BLJRMAN
Final Acticn Date : 01 Phons Number : (202) 382-207
Audit; is greats^ than 3o5 days past GIG/hanagement Agreement Date
GIG In -format ion.
Gf-Fics : ASSIST. ADMIN. FOR SOLID UIA3TE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Assign men t # ; EiDl*6-06-0156
Glosed Date : 09/21/S7
Better Use Recommend :
Batter Use Agreed :
Federal" '
Quest i oned
Ineligible
Unsupported
Unnec/Unres
Federal
Disal lowed j
.3SS5C-.
-------
10
i|
r i ; <
Li j 1
1 ! IH il.
:,: .. .i ...J tJ !-•
>"'i ii' '"I -* a:
ii. t :i r.-i L>:
•••! i -i a)
> 7^ ' .a:: v; i-
n Lil ff c'f. l!.J
;:- i o ii: u t H-
iii !•; T 7'' C[
H-- GJ o a: in i-
!•••• U i U! X. CO
>-'! I J Li. • !l!
iv u. to <••;: iiJ ...i n
:-r u '. ';•'• u. i: o.. ^
. O i .i 5 . 'T
l~ j- i J • 0.! n
•••••! M ri'i i: r: to
i... T- n i.;i LJ u: i':j
ITI o" :> ••••-: n ;i tu
"'i l.j.1 UJ fO u: h U
II, LI LL UJ :..."! O
""i at u. i.r
r.j n '• u (.1 i"J.
i- r i i I'.*.' ..•
iv >- ' ...j ~v 3:
m h- O C:i ! iii !..i,i
M '' i ' ii.! .-,- it: -•• .-
i u" a '"• ;;; LU
(I; jj 1 ! ,,' L;
i r • !-• !'!'! <<'.
hi !- i i ' .••'
!"'- ii'i i" i hi Ti -.v ;::<
,", • : i [•'•'!
ir: '"' hi o ;Y i. ^
! ' ! :' ) \ L . • i..;J i.... i
LU »•< :-. ' ' r: ir
'X ;'i"i i' i y: r."i
j i- l ! L.
i ': i J f- i- i .1
••!.' •;• i.:, I.I ',.!•'. ''I ' '•
t 1
'-•-...
'^ - U 6 m'.^' "'m r^
'r •- .! i;'.!- *-'., '-: ;; ;, n "" '" -"
s ?• ? ^;;- ;; ?,^j ^: ini a,
^ ":: - " §fen & :iuS . Vi t;n ^
H ; ss^ stta ^ ? £ ^s ;,. ;
•-•-, f. m >•• -;•' n a:. n. "•• l- y.J - ;i .'- r
..-' ! '••' -' • j -• „„:.. .. .... , ; i i i | i • .. I ) ._ i-..
Z >- M U ". ! H pi ^ ,-, &!' ^ "i'l'y "''"" f
.J f- : en _i 'r >• £ ,•;; ;,' . u- ,/ t. ,::, ,,. ,., s. c
H? tn "in:! l:'zlli z.'^- i;;?- ;± -
'% ^ Pa(" S|a! ll,u p.,:: inb o, |
Tiv ^ u.;i^ |!s ^ M -:: n, -I loj ^':i;
!;i • ; :'"' :..' ';: - ^ !:' "" ;- l>;
" ,., , • ,' - i ,: -:• \- Ml r :! V ' J f< LU l-i ! -- '•;' ••;>
; ' i.:-' ' ^ ,. -J :' TH m ,r i i .:i in !U •!.. i: i -1 f ' j::
^ ' ••••• l'..: ' ..... ,• , ..• .," ,;i T- ,:- i " r i ii! •• •- '- '~!
s. i: y^i h.^§ *t "^" ,: , !•• '••• -•
'a?1 ;;: =;Ky ^'ii;- ^-; -f;:?H; n.-.-- ••
in t • • •. • .1 ' -' ' ••-• . ' , • i , i , T • I- .. T; •
•:• [I/ JC. ..;i;. ;,;! il ' : .i U4 | ;;' L;r ,. ,., ' ,, j ,:.
'" 5 'i! in ;'! - n V n: ' o: - [u ^ 5: ' :i; -^ ;-.
'':' ' :''' ii -T r-H .•— . ..I,. ''..!.. "" '- '; ''':
-« • • i i •(• ' - ...... ,-, --!. r- | - - . , :-i ' "i :, j
r: LI.! "< >•> "< ':- tfi i'' !;i ^ " .-, ;•.; '..•' -'• •' 1 ,' , f!' ;T i'i i'^
! ; !.i. |J:! '.-•' T ''.,'. j.1 ,-r .1 ,* h.. CO LL IU : ! !f .'•- V' ll! !;
t J-. •:;" i, ;;i ;:..•: ;:';; m i ,;' i i ri u ii1! ' ' "' M • • , *
'...' ,, ::: ,;; ..' *,.'••• ;. : !.. ; ,L ,;; :;: > , •••.• in >-
-------
-------
Ll i
h-
U.J
111
til
iij
l_.
in
1.1
f in
in 1:1
r:i o
h t
u
tn -
111 >••
UJ ir:
LL.I Q ;r:
" * ":; !!!
i T "'
1,
! • I 1 1
1 i j
111
i i l I UI
n n L • K
*• H ^ LL UI
i _.i in
i
I LL .. J
Cl C i I f
L
i.
I Ul 'I
I
i i >ij a i
h I I
i i i in i
i i
_i i TI i
r- ,.„, ..... L . I f.
' f I »- I
I 1 I
I I I <
I i LI
i 'li i i '
r
i i
i
i r
i i
in Hi IU
i i
i
i
i
'
...i I I l-
i
•:. i t
i i
LI i
-------
-------
TIQN CT-: E',-'AL..-A":"E E^-CH 0^ THE REGIONAL r'ILOT PROJECT'S TO
:E~ERMINE I^HICH ONE is THE MOST EFFICIENT AND CAN BE USED AS A
'ANDARD.
:::RRECTI'.:E ACTION: THE CEFR POST-IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION DID NOT
INCLUDE A FORMAL REVIEW OF '"HE BENEFIT-COS" OF THE VARIOUS REGIONAL
: I_0T PROJECTS. HOWEVER, CERCLIS MANAGERS AND USERS REACHED A
ICNEEN3US BASED ON ACTUAL OPERATIONAL EXPERIECE, THAT REGION IV'S
'JAST'ELAN PROVIDED "HE MOST EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT PROCESSING
:'i_ATFCRM. ALL REGIONS HAVE IMPLEMENTED THE WASTELAN MODEL WITH THE
OF F.E3IQN IX OELA'-'ED DUE Tj THE EARTHQiJAKE.
'ED - OA/-9C
ECO^MENDAT'ICN (S) , E3'T'APLI5H ^ SYSTEMATIC CHANGE CONTROL PROCESS ^OP
EFMITTING ADDITIONAL.. REGIONAL AND HEADQUARTERS NEEDS TO BE EVALUATED
O APPROVED FOR INCLUSION INTO THE STANDARD SYSTEM."
"._., ;„ ; . : . ;„_ _ JC;
CHANGE CONTROL r'RCCE3S INCLUDES FORMAL
, IMFAC~ ANALYSIS, AND MANAGEMENT
:ON .91: ESTABLISH COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES AND ENFORCEMENTi|
j ENSURE DATA IS REFORMED ^ROPERLY, ACCURATELY, AND TIMEL
iCTICM: CZF.CLIS REPOT.TING IS TIGHTLY COUPLED TO PROGRAM
) ACCOMPLISHMENT EVALUATI ON. A3 A RESULT, THE REGIONS
'ATED TO PROVIDE TAMELY AND ACCURATE DATA.
MCMMENDAT
: WORK WIT- REGIONAL OFFICIALS TO ESTABLISH A
.ITY CENTER ^JI~"HIN THE REGIONS FOR SUPERFUND SITES.
RECOMMENDATI ON I MR LEMENTEI
::ECC;1MHNDA""ION -ill;:. REVIEW AND EVALUATE THE HEADQUARTERS SUPERFUND
FU!-.iCT:CNE AND RESPONSIBILITIES TO ASSESS THE FEASIBILITY OF A CENTRAL
RSSFGNSIS::LI~V CENTER FOR ALL SUPERFUND FUNCTIONS.
TO-REC~IVE ACTION-: RECOMMENDATION IMPLEMENTED. THIS RECOMMENDATION IS
::.CSELV K'SLA- EH TQ RECOMMENDATION (9^.
VL/33 'SEE RECOMMENDATION (9)
RECOMMENDA"ICN (1C):. DEVELOP FOR THE ADMINISTRATOR'S APPROVAL AN
AGENCY-WIDE DIRECTIVE FOR ESTABLISHING MANDATORY REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS FOR -CERCLIS.
CORRECTIVE ACTION: RECOMMENDATION NOT IMPLEMENTED. DATA IS OF
SUFFICIENT QUALITY TQ SUPPORT THE INFORMATION REQUIREMENT.
-------
IT!
IT
LJ
Li... O
-------
c
-------
Date : IO/28/91
Management Audit Tracking System
Datailad Audit
ii Com flieri 15
09/30/33 - DIG ISSUES FINAL REPORT OSWER RESPONDED 12/02/38 -
12/30/;=3 - CIS REPLIED THAT THEY CATEGORIZED THE OSWER RESPONSE AS
"NONRE3RON3IVE:1
,---, -T •- .•--. ~r / -—• —: :~i-—'T i r~ ™- '-i.AJi (A T": * -! T :— C" T
"HAT
'HE 01G ASKED THE AGENCY AUDIT
RESOLUTION GROUP {ARG) TQ RESOLVE THE IMPASSE CGNCERNINS THIS
04/21/39 ~ 013 PRESENTED ITS WRITTEN CONCERNS TO THE ARG
05/13/39 - OSWER RESPONSED TO THE ARG REQUEST TO CLARIFY J.T'3
•-•03ITICN ON EACH RECOMMENDATION
C7/07/39 - 013 ADVISED THE ARG THAT THEY WOULD CLOSE THE AUDIT
-ECOMMENDATION ( 1 j : ASSURE THAT THE EPA HQ PROJECT OFFICER (PO) MORE
AGGRESSIVELY MANAGE AND DIRECT OVERALL ZONE ACTIVITIES UNDER THE FIT
CONTRACT WITH NL3, THIS SHOULD INCLUDE INSTRUCTING THE PO TO MORE
CLOSELV MONITOR REGIONAL FIT OPERATIONS, AND INITIATE CORRECTIVE
MEASURES TO RECTIFY PROBLEMS AS THEY ARISE.
CORRECTIVE ACTION?
a) SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS TO REFLECT SOUND CONTRACT
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ARE INCORPORATED INTO EACH PC'S AND DEPUTY PO'S
•DPO'S) PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. PO'S AND DPO'S VISIT EACH REGION AT
LEAST CNCE A- YEAR TC CONDUCT. AN IN-DEPTH REVIEW OF FIT CONTRACT
OPERATIONS.
RECOMMENDATION (2): THE HQ PO SHOULD (A) INCREASE THE MINIMUM
REPORTING REQUIREMENT FOR FIT HOURS FROM 60 TO SO PERCENT; ASSURE
THAT R=:OS RATE CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH EPA GUIDANCE.
FURTHERMORE, AWARD FEES SHOULD BE PRINCIPALLY RESERVED FOR WORK
RELATED TD THE FIT PRIMARY MISSION. IN NO CASE SHOULD AWARD FEES BE
GRANTED FOR DEFICIENT WORK; (C) AND DECIDE ON A SINGLE RATING
EVALUATION SYSTEM, AND EMPLOY THAT SYSTEM UNIFORMLY THROUGHOUT THE
FOUR REGIONS.
CORRECTIVE ACTJQN:
;2A) WHILE WE A6REE WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION, WE DO NOT FEEL IT IS
PRACTICAL TO REQUIRE 80 PERCENT REPORTING LEVEL IN ALL CASES (E.G.
Ml >\ T T '
i ; U L_ ! A i
LONG-TERM PROJECTS).
C2B) WE-ACCEPT THIS RECOMMENDATION. THE AWARD FEE PLAN WAS APPENDED"
TO THE CONTRACT AND 'WAS DISTRIBUTED WITH THE CONTRACT AT THE TIME OF
AWARD AND IN THE FIT ZONE CONTRACTS USER'S MANUAL. ;
:2C) WE ACCEPT THIS RECOMMENDATION. THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION BOARD
(PEB) EVALUATES FIT CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE UNDER PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION CATEGORIES. EACH FIT OFFICE AND THE ZONE PROGRAM
MANAGEMENT OFFICE IS A SEPARATE- EVALUATION CATEGORY. THE AGENCY HAS
ATTEMPTED TO CHANGE AN INHERENTLY SUBJECTIVE PROCESS AND MAKE IT AS
OBJECTIVE AND CONSISTENT AS POSSIBLE. ' - „- -
• .•*- . '
RECOMMENDATION (3): THE HQ PO SHOULD BE INSTRUCTED^TQ: TA1S> ASSURE ,
TU AT CT; r~ ^ T -~> K ! A ' >-• 1-tr-p -«-i <—1-»- ,—%'p— -r /-ir— ^-. -—^ s\ • *-!-• t/-^r-.»-»*— t.r.—. ..jf**-.*— — - •-».. .-*.-. -^-. •—— —.—..—. — —
-------
-------
"i Ik
"El I -'_ -'RT'' ~- I MPLEME1" -""I f'
NCLUDE
IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH
"H*3 FECOMMENDATIDN AND HAS DECIDED IT
FG MANDATE TGXICDLDGICAL ASSESSMENTS F~R
i51L_ITv TG CONDUCT THESE ON AN AS NEEDED
M ;S- : " ";-E CONTRACTING OFFICER (CD) SHOULD OBTAIN THE
_ CURRENT AND FUTURE FIT OFFICE MANAGERS TO ASSURE THAT
•"HE EDUCATIONAL AND EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
E--ZRY FIT C:;'FICE f-iATJAGER i:URRENTLv HAS A RESUME ON FILE AND WAS"
CAREFULLY EVA^jATED TO DETERMINE HI5 CR HER QUALIFICATIONS.
Ri::CGJ"MENDA"IQN (6;: THE :-'C SHOULD BE INSTRUCTED TO ASSURE THAT TDD' S
ARE ADMINISTERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ERA "FIT ZONE CONTRACTS
MANAGEMENT GUIDE."
""HE AGENCY AGREES ^ITH THIS RECOMMENDATION. THE MANAGEMENT GUIDE
•:::::ORr;EP;..V TITLED, "-IT ZONE CONTRACTORS USERS GUIDE") WAS ISSUED
I'HTiilN ONE MON^H JF CONTRACT AWARD. EACH RPO WAS INSTRUCTED IN THE
TRANSNI'TTAL MEMCRANDUM TO FOLLOW THE TDD ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES.
-------
-------
,-± IN ROUTINE CGMMUNICA
Nan aa;
'rsrkLnp 3-/sts;i! (MATS)
Final Act:.jf( Da";e
'
:n=?.ri ._:fcb days
: AA/GSWER/GWP!
: SUSAN 5ROMM
^ c r" e 2 :Ti t? P, t D 6. "t 3
rma* i or.
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Federal
Questi oned
supported
Unnsc/Un res
DN 2ANNOT
IMF_.EMENTA
1992.
GR THIS AUDIT HAVE LARGELY BEEN IMPLEMENTED.
EE COMPLETED UNTIL RCRI3 PILOT TESTING IS COMPLETE
TIGN IS COMPLETED IN ALi_ REGIONS AND STATES BY THE
-------
INDUCTED THROUGHGU"
S FIVE NEW STARS
n-'p,- nppQF
i i-ii'-iiJ
I -ED AND
rCf 3 ADDRESSING THE
"i^C FRAMES FOR
[' S EOT IONS, AND C'
SE OF
ES WI...L. TRACK REGIONAL PROGRESS IN MEETING
N "HE RCRA ENFORCEMENT RESPONSE POLICY
;3 sivir-o GUIDANCE ON
GN (4) :
ACK INS
MPROVE
rGR:-'1 AN ASSES
>1 '--HAT CAN EZ
SMEN~T TO DETERMINE AN EFFECTIVE
UI\IFORI"1LV I'-IPLEMENTED BY THE
ING AND ENCOURAGE THE RESIGNS T!
"ESTINO TO REPLACE HWDM3 IS COMPLETED IN REGION
- .COMPLETE RCP.IS IMRLEMEN~AT::ON IN ALL REGIONS AND STATES
"i A MEflORANDUM WAS SENT TO rHE REGIONS REQUIRING INTERIM
AND FCLL014--UF SYSTEM UNTIL RCRI3 IS IMPLEMENTED.
TION :5;s ESTABLISH AGENCY-WIDE STANDARDS REQUIRING THE
iCE IF ROST-ORSER CCflFLIANCE FILES.
-------
-------
-------
m i o
CJ 'Z.
'V T CI
:- rn u.i
o :^ -H
<" m 3>
I n n ;.n
i i:: in Q
! m a. m
i ii' rs :,;:-:
i '"I" "i i"l
-------
-------
SIS TO THE REGIONS THE AGENCY'S POLICIES
BENEFITS IN PROPOSED AND ASSESSED
:;.CRA CIVIL PENALTY POLICY WAS RELEASED " QN OCTOBER
F':OM EACH REGION ON THEIR EFFORTS TO
r:'-'
C-A CI' I_ -ENALTY POLICY IS DUE.
EDI i_::r. "OP COMPLETION ON 09/30/90.
'HIS ACTION
: RE-EMPHASIS TO THE REGIONS THE INTENT OF THE .„
OLICIES ON 7HE COMPUTATION OF GRAVITY-BASED PROPOSED
,: r-
/29/90 - RELEASE OF RCRA CIVIL PENALTY POLICY. USED AS A GUIDANCE
CUMENT "OR REGIONS ON ESTABLISHING AND NEGOTIATING APPROPRIATE RCRA
ECOMMENDATION (Z~i : OECM AND OSWER INCREASE THEIR OVERSIGHT OF
EGIONAL ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL TO ASSURE THAT NEGOTIATED PENALTIES
COMPLY WITH Ti-iE RCRA CIVIL PENALTY POLICY.
iO/Ol/S? - GECM SENT A MEMO TO ALL AAS AND RAS DESCRIBING THE NEED TO
ADHERE TO AGENCY PENALTY POLICIES AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS.
'• 0/2C'/?0 - OSWER AND OE SENT A JOINT MEMO TO THE REGIONS WHEN THE RCPP
;^-S RELEASED STRESSING ADHERENCE TO THE RCPP AND DOCUMENTATION
^EOUIREMZNTS. FURTHERMORE, OSUjER AND OE ARE CONDUCTING RCPP TRAINING
yJHICH FURTHER STRESSES THESE NEEDS, THE REGIONS WILL BE CONDUCTING
SEL.F AUDITS AND 03WER WILL BE REVIEWING PENALTY CALCULATIONS. ALL
Ti-,ESE ACTIVITIES WILL HELP ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RCPP CALCULATION
AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS.
Ti-cls : LUST PROGRAM
Audit 4 : 91004S7
M:3 t Dec 15 i en Proposed :
Mgt Dscisio- Actual : 04/04/90
Date : 09/21/891
Region/HQ 0-f-fice s AA/OSWER/LUST
Action -0-f-ficial : DAVID 2IEGELE
Phone Number : (703) 308-8S50
ne.I Actiarf Date :
,d i t 12 greater than 3i5 days past OIG/Management Agreement Date
I
-------
-------
'.."•", (MILESTONE TO .'*•-
ORIGINAL 05/30/90 TARGEf
:~E::~REEENTATIVE3 OF THE ASSOCIATION OF
D i--A5:"Z MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS (ASTSWMC) TO
.1~IE3 CONCERNING EXPOSURE RATH- WAYS,
;RPECTIVE ACTION WAS CHANGED FROM ORIGINAL
:L.£5'
RELEASE POLICY CN THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE STATES
AL.L PATHWAYS CF EXPOSURE TO GASDL INE~CCNTAMINA~ED WATER.
EMENT CORRECTIVE ACTION WAS CHANGED FROM ORIGINAL
TE TO 04/01/91)
T'S AND HEALTH/ TO REC
-------
-------
-------
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
SUPERftrtf CONTRACTS
ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
FEBRUARY 1992
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT DIVISION
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20460
-------
-------
02/27/92
ENVIROM1ENTAI PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE 1
C-PC SPANS 65«65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR
C -CLASS
PROD/SRVC
SB AREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDINB PROGRAM
AREAS
«••••
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
TECHNOLOGY APPLICATION INC.
6101 STEVENSON AVE
ALEXANDRIA VA 22304
PIPKINS GROUP
994 DANA AVE
CINCINNATI OH 45229
ITEP ASSOCIATES. INC
CHESTER TONERS
11499 CHESTER RD
CINCINNATI OH 45246
ITEP ASSOCIATES, INC
CHESTER TOWERS
11499 CHESTER RD
CINCINNATI OH 45246
S-CUBED
TO BOX 1620
LA JOLLA CA 92036
AQUA TERRE COMPANY
2672 BAYSHORE PKHY
MOUNTAIN VIEH CA 94043
THE CADMUS GROUP INC
135 BEAVER ST.
HALTHAM MA 02154
TECHNICAL RESOURCES INC
3202 TONER OAKS BLVD
SUITE 200
ROCKVILLE HD 20B52
RADIAN CORP
6501 MO-PAC BLVD
P.O. BOX 201066
AUSTIN TX 76720
SYRACUSE UNIV RSRCH CORP
MERRILL LN
UNIV HEIGHTS
SYRACUSE NY 13210
LARGE BUS CPAF OPPERMAN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ROBERT F. THOMAS
OH-SITE ANALYSIS SUPPORT/RREL/CI
SMALL BUS FP TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 PANLIKAS
TECHNICAL/ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
LARGE BUS CPFF OPPERMAN
SERVICES 65 SIMES
TECH.SUP.3ERV.9A/WC PROG./RREL
12/26/69 66C00001 C
09/30/94 C90901RB1 B504
X
01/19/90 66C00010 S
09/30/92 C90924RB1 T001
D
02/14/90 66C00015 C
09/30/92 C9R0162B1 AZ11
X
LARGE BUS CPFF
TECHNICAL SRVC 65
OPPERMAN
POWERS
06/01/90
09/30/92
DURABLE FIBER ABATEMENT TECH.ENS.SERVICES
66COOV16 C
C90927RB1 R599
X
LARGE BUS CPFF OPPERMAN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 SIMS
RREL/QA/QC SUPPORT
SHALL BUS CPFF OPPERMAN
SERVICES 65 GOLD
EXPOSURE/RISK ASSESS./ERL/ATHENS
05/25/90 66C00017 C
09/30/93 C90636RB1 AZ11
X
06/22/90 66C00019 C
•9/30/93 C90916RB1 R504
C
LARGE BUS CPFF TANNER 04/13/90 66C00020 C
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 LONG 09/30/93 C90627MB1 F202
TECHNICAL SUPPORT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNDERGROUND X
SMALL BUS CPAF LITTLEFIELD
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FRANK
TECH.SUP.SERVICES/CORY
LARGE BUS CPAF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 HALL
CONSUMER COMM.REGS.DEVEL.
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF OPPERMAN
SERVICES 65 POIRIER
ENV.HLTH.ASSESS.DOC.
04/27/90 66C00021 C
03/31/94 C90476RB1 R421
A
07/10/90 66C00032 C
06/30/95 C00209MB1 F202
X
11/20/90 6BC00043 C
09/30/92 C00929RB1 AH91
X
62C
62C
62C
62C
62C
63K
40E
63M
28C
643
09/30/94
11,9U.lt!
09/30/92
66B.476
09/30/92
1,123.065
09/30/92
2.263.113
09/30/93
1.221,524
09/30/93
13.646.240
03/31/94
Cl.Sei.149
06/30/91
M.965.797
09/30/93
4,597,807
CIS
BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
I I
-------
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PA6E
C-PC SPANS *5»65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE
EFFORT
PROJECT TITLE
COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE CONTRACT
PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-OATE RFP-
C-CUSS REPRESENTATIVE
PROO/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAH HAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS HAX.POTVAL
BELMONTE PARK LABORATORY
1415 SALEM AVENUE
DAYTON OH 45406
PRC ENVIRON MGMT. INC.
303 E. HACKER OR. SUITE 500
CHICAGO IL 60601
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
8
-------
OZ/Z7/9Z
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
C-PC SPANS 65««5:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C -CLASS
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
4H^^n
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
HADE MILLER ASSOCIATES. INC.
1911 N. FT. MYER DR. 1702
ARLINGTON VA 22209
ABT ASSOC INC
55 MHEELER ST
CAMBRIDGE MA 02138
ICF INC
9300 LEE HNY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
PIPKINS GROUP
994 DANA AVE
CINCINNATI OH 45229
DONALD CLARK ASSOCIATES
4045 S. SPENCER ST. OA-59-B
LAS VEGAS NV 69109
TEMPLE. BARKER t SLOANE INC
33 HAYDEN
LEXINGTON MA 02173
SYRACUSE UNIV RSRCH CORP
MERRILL LN
UNIV HEIGHTS
SYRACUSE NY 13210
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
&400 NESTPARK DR.
MCLEAN VA 22102
SCI APPLIC INC
•JRB ASSOC INC
8400 NESTPARK DR
MCLEAN VA 22102
AFCI INC
1365 BEVERLY RD
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
SMALL BUS CPFF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FOLSON
ECONOMIC/POLICY ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS CPFF TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 HATKINS
ECON./REG.ANAL./EVAL.SUP.
LARGE BUS CPFF ADAMS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BARLES
POLICY t TECH.ANALYSIS
SMALL BUS CPFF TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MORRISON
MAILROON SERVICES
SMALL BUS FP SCOTT
SERVICES 65 MILLER
DONALD CLARK ASSOC.
10/01/90 68C00069 C
09/30/93 C00903NB1 R421
A
10/01/90 68C00080 C
09/30/94 C00937HB1 C214
X
09/28/90 68C00083 C
09/30/92 C00930MB1 R498
X
09/30/90 68COOOB4 S
09/30/93 C01375FB1 R533
D
09/20/90 68C00085 C
09/30/93 C00949RB1 8215
C
LARGE BUS CPFF CONNOLLY 09/29/9* 68C00090 C
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 NIEHUS 09/30/93 C00908MB1 F103
TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR EVALUATION • DEVELOPMENT X
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MCKEAN
HEALTH ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTS
LARGE BUS CPAF OPPERMAN
SERVICES 65 GANT
ON-SITE TECH.SUPPORT
LARGE BUS CPAF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FORSHT
REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT
SMALL BUS CPFF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 NEE SMITH
TECH SUPPORT - ATHENS LAB
01/29/91 68C10004 C
09/30/92 C000933T1 AH31
X
01/17/91 68C10005 C
09/30/95 C00904RB1 AH31
X
01/01/91 66C10006 C
09/30/92 C000922T1 AH31
X
03/21/91 68C10012 S
09/30/92 C01350RB1 AH91
D
40C
28A
28C 06P 02K
09L 20R
52E
60J
29A
643
63P
28C
31C
09/30/93
7,601.032
09/30/94
3.451.931
09/30/93
14.389,710
09/30/93
824.830
09/30/93
613,332
09/30/93
2.062.425
09/3
4,228.626
09/30/99
37,200.541
09/30/94
8.107.238
09/30/92
t.734.218
CIS D
A3E AS OF OZ/27/9Z
EK/1
I I
-------
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
C-PC SPANS 6***5:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
EASTERN RESEARCH GROUP INC
6 HHITTEHORE ST
ARLINGTON MA 02174
GLOBAL GEOCHEMISTRY CORP
6919 ETON AVE
CANOGA PARK CA 91303
HAZ-STOR INC.
2454 DEMPSTER STREET
DESPLAINES IL 60016
TECHNOLOGY APPLICATION INC.
6101 STEVENSON AVE
ALEXANDRIA VA 22304
TECH30FT SYSTEMS INC.
1375 KEMPER MEAOON OR
CINCINNATI OH 45240
TECHNOLOGY APPLICATION INC.
6101 STEVENSON AVE
ALEXANDRIA VA 22304
MIDMEST RSRCH INST
•BIOLOGICAL SCI OIV
425 VOLKER BLVD
KANSAS CITY MO 64110
EASTERN RESEARCH GROUP INC
6 HHITTEHORE ST
ARLINGTON MA 02174
DAEDALUS ENTERPRISE INC.
P.O. BOX 1669
ANN ARBOR HI 46166
TILLMAN ASSOCIATES INC
RT 7 BOX 306
ADA OK 74620
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
1710 GOODRID6E DR.
P.O. BOX 1303
MCLEAN VA 22102
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE CONTRACT
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE RFP-NBR
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS CPFF HODGSON 09/30/91 66C10016
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MANNING 69/30/94 C01356RB1
CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION TECH. SUPPORT
SMALL BUS FP OPPERMAN
SERVICES 65 GOLD
WIANTITIVE ORGANIC ANALYTICAL SERVICES
SHALL BUS FP BZDUSEK
EQUIPMENT 65 CASTRO
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STORAGE BLOBS
LARGE BUS CPAF CONNOLLY
SERVICES 65 THOMAS
GN-SITE TECHNICAL SUPPORT EHSL
SMALL BUS FP HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 REYNOLDS
ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
05/22/91 66C10020
02/26/92 C00206RB1
03/12/91 66C10021
03/26/92 C001518T1
64/61/91 66C10022
69/36/92 C001221T1
04/17/91 66C10023
09/30/93 C100653T1
LARGE BUS CPAF OPPERMAN 05/09/91 66C10024
SERVICES 65 ROGER NEESHITH 09/30/95 C10002RT1
ON-SITE TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR US EPA IN ATHENS. GA
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF OPPERNAN
SERVICES 65 NERNER BECKERT
ANAL METHODS DEVELP ft EVAL, SAMPLE ANAL.
LARGE BUS CPFF ANDERSON
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 CAROL HAYNES
TECHNICAL SUPPORT FOR PEER REVIEN
SMALL BUS FP ODEN
EQUIPMENT 65 LUNETTA
AIRCRAFT MULT. SCANNING RECORDING SYSTEM
SMALL BUS CPFF CONNOLLY
SERVICES 65 PFEFFER
PEER REVIEN ft ADMIN. SUPPORT FOR RSKERL.
07/10/91 66C10029
09/30/94 C100019RB
ft QA TECH SUPPORT
07/17/91 66C10030
09/30/92 C100605T1
07/14/91 66C10036
07/15/92 C100646T1
09/30/91 66C 10046
09/30/92 C100676T1
ADA
LARGE BUS CPFF TANNER 10/01/91 66C10066
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ANN HERN 09/30/92 C100063T1
TECH SUPPORT FOR PRFL QUALITY ' ASSURANCE ft SAFETY PROGRAM
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE «••••)
PROD/9RVC FUNDING PROGRAM HAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
C
AH91
A
C
R504
C
C
9416
A
C
R504
X
9
AH91
D
C
AH91
X
C
AH90
X
C
B599
X
C
K066
A
C
R498
A
C
R599
X
26R
60A
51E
60A
52E
43K
60J
648 72A 64
643
269 66J
63L
62C
69/36/94
3.564.136
02/26/94
11.666
OS/M/M
114,466
03/31/9*
16.667.947
69/36/93
555,246
69/36/99
16,633.253
69/36/94
4.466.77*
69/30/99
3.661.716
07/15/92
449.671
69/36/93
344.643
09/30/96
t. 949. 719
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
I i
-------
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ABENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PABE
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C -CLASS
EXP-DATE RFP-NBM PROD/9RVC
9BAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDINB PR08RAM
AREAS
^•^tM
MAX.EXP
HAX.POTVAL
CLEMENT ASSOC INC
9300 LEE HHV
FAIRFAX VA 22031
LABAT-ANDERSON
2200 CLARENDON BLVD.
SUITE 900
ARLINGTON VA 22209
SIERRA TECHNICAL SERVICES
4208 ARCATA HAY,
SUITE A
N. LAS VEGAS NV B9030
TECHNOLOGY APPLICATION INC.
6101 STEVENSON AVE
ALEXANDRIA VA 22304
NORTHROP CORP
•NORTHROP SRVCS INC
P 0 BOX 12313
RSRCH TRI PK NC 27709
RADIAN CORP
6409 RSRCH BLVD
AUSTIN TX 78756
NORTHROP CORP
•NORTHROP SRVCS INC
P 0 BOX 12313
RSRCH TRI PK NC 27709
EASTERN RESEARCH GROUP INC
6 MUTTEHORE ST
ARLINGTON MA 0217*
ARTHUR D LITTLE INC
CO ACORN PARK
CAMBRIDGE MA 021*0
AFCI INC
1365 BEVERLY RD
TO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
LARGE BUS CPFF CONNOLLY 09/30/91 68C10076 C
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 CIOMNEC 09/58/92 C100003T1 R421
TECH SUPPORT - ENV HEALTH ASSESSMENT DOCUNCNT9/ECAO X
SHALL BUS OPPERHAN 11/01/91 68C20100 C
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 EARL EASTWOOD 09/30/92 C101360T1 L099
SUPPORT SRVCE FOR DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF USEPA
SMALL BUS CPFF CONNOLLY It/09/91 66C20101 C
SERVICES 65 KANTOR 89/98/91 C01215RB1 1496
TECHNICAL SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF ENVIRN MONITORING C
SMALL BUS CPAF BZDUSEK/CB
SERVICES 65 RATHBURN
TECH.SUP.MARINE DISCHG.ACTIV/ODM/MA
LARGE BUS CPAF ENIN6ER/DR
SERVICES 65 FRANK
TECH. ADM.SUP.SERV/CORV
LARGE BUS CPFF SAVA6E/LH
RESEARCH • DEV 65 COUGH LIN
TECH.SUP.REGUL.DEV/ODN/NA
LARGE BUS CPAF REYNOLDS
RESEARCH ft OEV 65 COSBY
TECH.SUP.SERV.FOR ADA/ADA
SMALL BUS CPFF BZDUSEK/CB
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MINTZ
DCV.CftIT.DOC.t HLTH.ADVIS/ODN/NA
LARGE BUS CPFF ENINBER/DR
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ROYER
PEER REVIEH I GRAPHICS AIDS SUP/ADA
SMALL BUS CPFF TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 HATTHENS
TECH.SUP.SERV/ADA
12/26/69 66C60001 C
09/58/94 CI87IH38 F183
A
82/28/66 66C60006 C
82/26/92 CI67R363 AZ11
X
84/81/66 66C68006 C
89/38/92 CI87N774 F183
X
86/16/68 68C60025 C
89/98/92 C6R0001B1 AZ11
X
69/36/66 66C68633 C
69/36/92 C6H8266B1 F163
C
69/38/69 66C66637 C
09/36/93 C6R0276B1 R4tl
X
16/61/98 68C66658 9
08/31/93 C6R0355B1 H299
D
643
31R 268 52E
26S 32M
66J
87A
63S 63M
tec
63L
410
4SL
63L 75K 63L
75K
4,43f.9M
69/38/94
5,775,342
02/26/92
», 161.444
69/38/9t
ft.6M.tl4
69/38/92
7,699.526
69/38/91
3.461.2*2
69/38/93
426.319
69/36/93
5.699.435
CIS
BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
l I
-------
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PA6E
C-PC SPANS 65"*5<
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE
EFFORT
PROJECT TITLE
COST
PC
NEMTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
EFF-DATE
EXP-OATE
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
C-CLA9S
PROO/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDINB PROGRAM
AREAS
HAX.EXP
HAX.POTVAL
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
MOO NESTPARK DR.
MCLEAN VA 22102
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
8400 HESTPARK DR.
MCLEAN VA 22102
SCI APPLIC INC
•JRB ASSOC INC
MOO NESTPARK OR
MCLEAN VA 22102
BATTELLE MEM INST
COLUMBUS LABS
505 KING AVE
COLUMBUS OH 43201
THE CADMUS GROUP INC
355 CONCORD AVE
BELMONT MA 02176
TETRA TECH CORP
1030* EATON PLACE SUITE
FAIRFAX VA 22030
340
ODD COMPANY
6300 PROFESSIONAL PL. til7
LANDOVER MB 20765
VIAR I CO
112 SO PITT ST
ALEXANDRIA VA 22314
NASHINBTON DC 20041
AMER MBT SYSTEMS
1777 N. KENT 9T
ARLINGTON VA 22209
NASHINBTON DC 20041
CINCINNATI. UNIV OF
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
CINCINNATI OH 45221
LAME BUS CPAF SAVAGE
TECHNICAL 9RVC 65 STONE
TECH.EHB.i SERV/HHERL/CI
LARGE BUS CPAF NISE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 STONE
TECH.ENB.t SERV.(HAC6R6611B1IRREL/CL
URGE BUS CPAF BZDU3EK/3H
TECHNICAL SRVC 61 POLVI
NTH.ENFORCE.4 PERMIT* PROB.SMVOMEP/MA
NON/PRFT RSCH CPAF REYNOLDS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 RATHBUN
TECH.3UP/OMEP/MAV55) NISE
SMALL BUS CPAF ENINGER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 COLEHAN
NTR.INFORC.I PERMITS.SUP/ONEP/HA
LARGE BUS CPAF ENINGER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BROSSMAN
MATER qUAL.HONITORINB/OMRS/NA
10/19/66 66C60061 C
09/30/92 C6R0011B1 F101
X
01/14/69 66C60062 C
09/30/92 C9R0043B1 R421
X
69/39/66 66C80066
69/36/92 C6N6422B1
C
F103
X
61/24/69 68C66105 C
69/36/92 C6N6563B1 R421
X
6V01/B9 66C90009 C
69/36/93 C6H6714B1 F163
C
63/16/69 66C90013 C
62/26/93 C6H1246B1 R421
X
SMALL BUS CPFF BZDUSEK 04/61/69
SERVICES 65 EASTNOOO 69/36/92
FUNDINB FOR NEN FORM/PUBUCATIONS/CTR/FMSO/CS
66C96616 C
C6F0354B1 T612
C
SMALL BUS CPFF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 LANDMAN
SCIENTIFIC A TECH.SUP./ONRS/HA
LARGE BUS CPAF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 RATHBUN
6EN.PROG.SUP/OHEP/MA
NON/PRFT UNIV CR OPPERHAN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 GROSSE
TECH.SUP.FOR CNTR.HILL/RREL/CI
04/06/69 66C96619 C
69/36/93 C9N6606B1 R421
A
07/31/69 66C90029 C
69/36/93 C8H0562B1 R421
A
11/13/69 68C90031 C
09/30/92 C96394RB1 R425
X
62C
62C
230 23A 236)
230 23A
67A
230 23A
26B 266
31A TIE
26C 23A 260
67A
62C
69/30/9*
47,144,17*
69/36/92
9,417,272
69/36/99
61.279.015
69/36/92
13.243.131
69/36/93
36,428.463
02/26/93
11.624.436
69/36/92
962,616
69/36/93
26.916.26C
69/36/93
17.555.264
11.351,954
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
II
02/27/92
ENVIMNMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PACE
C-PC SPANS *§««5l
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
BIONETICS CORP
2 EATON STREET, 10TH FL.
HARBOUR CENTRE BLDG.S-1000
HAMPTON VA 29669
FH ENVIRESPONSE INC.
110 S. ORANGE AVE.
LIVINGSTON NJ 07039
ARTHUR 0 LITTLE INC
20 ACORN PARK
CAMBRIDGE HA 02140
ACUREX CORP
•ENERGY > ENVIRONMENTAL DIV
485 CLYDE AVE
MOUNTAIN VIEN CA 94039
ROM SCIENCES INC
5S15 SECURITY LANE
SUITE 900
ROCKVILLE MD 20652
AMER. SCIENTIFIC INTL. INC
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
S-CUBEO
PO BOX 1620
LA JOLLA CA 92038
DAVCO
2200-B VANKER RD
SAN JOSE CA 99131
HEALTH RESOURCES
304 CAMBRIDGE
NOBURN HA 01801
BATTELLE HEM INST
COLUMBUS LABS
505 KING AVE
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPAF ANDERSON
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 RAY MESSELHAN
EFF-OATE
EXP-DATE
10/01/89
09/30/92
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
64C90032
C90497RB1
TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR EMSL DUALITY CONTROL
LARGE BUS CPAF REYNOLDS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MASTERS
ETCC. SUP. /RREL/EOISON
LARGE BUS CPFF SAVAGE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 UNE FRANK
PERS PROT TECH RES
LARGE BUS CPAF NISE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 THURNAU
09/SO/89
09/30/94
•9/39/89
•9/30/93
•9/30/89
•9/30/92
68C90033
C9090IRB1
68C9M37
C90906RB1
68C90038
C90393RB1
OPNS * RSCH AT USEPA COMBUSTION RSCH FACILITY
SHALL BUS CPFF TANNER
SERVICES 65 CICMANEC
ANIMAL SUPPORT SER VICES/HER L/CI
SHALL BUS CPFF ADAMS
SERVICES 65 BURKHART
ORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALY.SUP./DUL
LARGE BUS CPFF OPPERHAN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 GUY SIMES
10/01/89
•9/30/92
19/91/90
09/30/92
09/15/89
•9/30/92
68C90047
C90912RB1
6BC 90050
C90416RB1
68C90051
C90637RB1
TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR RREL 4A/QC PROGRAM
SMALL BUS FP HOLLAND
MAINTENANCE/ JN 65 BLAZEVICH
PROVIDE SVC.t MAINT.ON BC/M3/D3 SYSTEMS
LARGE BUS FP KIRBY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BEDDOMS
SERVICES FOR MEDICAL MONITORING - REG.
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF DAVIS
RESEARCH t DEV 65 PLEIL
10/01/89
•9/30/92
02/02/90
09/30/9E
I
02/05/90
09/30/93
6800*00 1
0901754P1
68D00002
D900256N1
68000007
D900838H1
EXP. ASSESS METHODS RES. ft DEV. FOR ENV. POLL. .ETC.
C-CLASS
PROD/SRVC
8BAREA
C
AH91
X
C
F101
X
C
R421
X
C
H181
X
C
R416
C
C
8999
A
C
B504
X
A
J066
A
C
2201
X
C
AH21
X
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
40P
62C
62C
62C 62A
61H
63N «M 05H
28B
62C UP
10P
01S
60E
MAX. EXP
MAX.POTVAL
•w
•9/30/93
9, 7*1, 337
mmmm
09/30/94
72 » 391, 783
••H*
•9/3«/93
4,2*8,319
••MV
•9/39/94
17,757,010
«•••§
•9/30/92
2.1M,633
«••••
•9/30/n
4.M2.9B4
•MB
•9/3«/92
1,241, MO
'••9
•9/3»/92
132.405
4BJBJBJBJI
09/30/92
3(5,450
•MMMP
•9/30/92
4.948,649
COLUMBUS OH 43201
CIS f
BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
02/27/V2
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNDR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PACE
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
VIGYAN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
30 RESEARCH DR.
HAMPTON VA 23666
H.L. ENER6IA, INC
P.O. BOX 1468
PRINCETON NJ 06542
RESEARCH ft EVALUATION ASSOC
100 EUTOPA OR
SUITE 590
CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
BAYAUD INDUSTRIES
95 SOUTH CHEROKEE
DENVER CO 00223
GENERAL SCIENCES CORPORATOIN
6100 CHEVY CHASE DR.
LAUREL MD 20707
VIAR ft CO
112 SO PITT ST
ALEXANDRIA VA 22314
TECHNICAL RESOURCES INC
3202 TOMER OAKS BLVD
SUITE 200
ROCKVILLE MD 20852
THE CADMUS GROUP INC
135 BEAVER STREET
MALTHAM MA 02154
TETRA TECH CORP
10306 EATON PLACE SUITE 340
FAIRFAX VA 22030
VERSAR INC
•GEN TECHNOLOGIES OIV
6050 VERSAR CENTER
SPRIN6FIELO VA 22151
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS CPFF MEANT
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 DONALDSON
TECH.SUPP.FOR AIR. POLL. CONTROL PROGRAMS
SMALL BUS FP LLOYD
RESEARCH ft OEV 65 CAREY
SBIR - PHASE II
SMALL BUS CPFF MEANT
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 RAY
TECH. REV. MORKSHOP ft CONF.SUPP.SVC3.
SMALL BUS FP MEANT
SERVICES 65 JORDAN
AOMIN SUPPORT SERVICES - REGION 8
SMALL BUS CPPF HOUSER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 OELPIRE
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT ft MODELING SUPPORT
09/12/90
09/30/92
09/25/90
09/23/92
09/26/90
09/30/95
10/15/90
09/30/92
07/02/90
06/30/92
SMALL BUS CPFF RICHARDS 09/30/90
SERVICES 65 HAEBERER 09/30/93
TECH.SUPP.TO THE DIV.OF DATA WML. OBJECTIVES
SMALL BUS CPFF RICHARDS
SERVICES 65 KIRKLAND
HONIT.NOD.ft ENV. PROCESSES ft EFF. SUPPORT
SMALL BUS CPFF LLOYD
RESEARCH ft OEV 65 MESSER
TECH.SUPP.TO ATMOS.RES.ft EXP.ASSESS.LAB.
09/30/90
04/30/95
09/26/90
09/30/92
LARGE BUS CPFF RICHARDS 09/30/90
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 SCHAUM 09/30/93
TECH.SUPP.ft RES. ft DEV. FOR EXP. ft RISK ASSESS.
LARGE BUS CPAF RICHARDS 09/30/90
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 SCHAUM 09/30/95
TECH.SUPP.ft RES. ft DEV FOR EXP ft RISK ASSESS
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
60000010
0000612N1
60000051
D0019S6M1
60000073
D000000H1
60000074
D001009N1
60000000
D901372L1
60000003
D901733M1
68000092
D001784H1
68000095
0900955M1
68D00100
D900941H1
66000101
D001961N1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE 4B5S51BB5B
PROO/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM MAX. EXP
8BAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
8
L099
D
C
AMI
C
8
R499
0
8
R699
A
C
F401
A
C
R415
A
C
AH11
E
C
F999
C
C
AH11
X
C
AH11
X
530 53C 75E «•*••*
09/M/tl
1,228.5*1
09/25/92
118.000
09/30/98
2.806,614
088 00T 00L «RM
89/30/91
351.077
69E 69T 69C «••§
69E 69T 06/10/93
2.022.013
09/30/93
1.110.716
04/10/95
1.777.088
09/30/93
1.297.5*8
642 i *•••?
09/3*7*3
„ 302.500
09/30/95
1.242.161
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
PAGE
CNBR SORT
ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65»6Si
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
JOHN E. DOMELL D
0-MELL BOX 99069
P.O. BOX 39069
TACOMA HA 98499
JHK INTERNATIONAL CORP.
7617 LITTLE RIVER TURNPIKE
ANNANDALE VA 22003
NORTHROP CORP
•NORTHROP SRVCS INC
P 0 BOX 12313
RSRCH TRI PK NC 27709
SKINNER ft SHERMAN LABS INC
300 SECOND AVE BOX 521
HALTHAM MA 02254
SKINNER ft SHERMAN LABS INC
300 SECOND AVE BOX 521
NALTHAH MA 02254
SCI APPLIC INC
«JRB ASSOC INC
0400 MESTPARK DR
MCLEAN VA 22102
PACIFIC ENVIRON SERVICES
HERNDON PKNT SUITE 200
HERNDON VA 22070
RADIAN CORP
8501 HO-PAC BLVD
P.O. BOX 201068
AUSTIN TX 78720
BATTELLE MEW INST
COLUMBUS LABS
505 KIN6 AVE
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME I
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER 1
PROJECT TITLE
SHALL MIS FP MEANT
SERVICES 65 DAVIS
JANITORIAL SVCS-EPA-REBION 10
LARGE BUS CPFF HOUSER
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 HULL
SUPP. TO EPA WJAL.ASSUR. TRAINING PROGRAM
LARGE BUS CPAF HOUSER
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 BUFALINI
ON-SITE RES. SUPP. TO AREAL
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 KURD
CHEM. ANAL. SVCS., INORGANICS LARGE BIO LOT
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 KURD
CHEH. ANAL. SVCS. INORGANICS SM.BID LOT
LARGE BUS CPFF HOUSER
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 DONALDSON
ID000309N1I
SHALL BUS CPFF MEANT
RESEARCH ft OEV 65 DONALDSON
TECH. SUPP. FOR AIR POLL. CONTROL PROGRAMS
URGE BUS CPFF KIRBY
RESEARCH ft OEV 65 DONALDSON
(D000309N1)
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF KEMPF
SERVICES 65 STERRETT
STAT. ANAL. SUPP. FOR ASSESS. OF TOXIC SUBS.
•FF-DATE
IXP-DATE
10/29/90
09/30/93
•9/19/90
09/30/92
09/30/90
•9/30/92
•9/87/90
03/07/93
89/«7/9«
03/07/93
09/27/9*
09/30/92
09/28/90
09/38/92
•9/29/90
09/38/92
•9/29/90
•9/30/92
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68000104
D000983N1
4800*105
D008147M1
68000106
D000203M1
68000108
D000462R1
68000109
D000461R1
68000122
D001787N1
68000124
D000309N1
68000125
D001924N1
68000126
D000468L1
C-CLASS
PROD/SRV
SBAREA
8
S201
D
C
R999
X
C
F999
X
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
X
C
AH21
X
C
AH21
A
C
AH21
X
C
F401
X
REPRESENTATIVE •••••
C FUNDING PROGRAM MAX. EX?
AREAS MAX.POTVAL
10H •
•9/30/93
97 >3M
60U •••••
•9/38/tt
992. *6*
6«E 63H 6«E •••••
•2K 60E 06/30/95
39.841.195
72F 8OPJBJPB
•3/07/93
1,679.040
72F «•••
•3/»7/93
1.479,040
53F 53B ••••
•9/M/9S
0. 641 1 196
53F 538 •••*
•9/M/93
12.325.762
S3A «MBHRV
•9/39/93
6.6M.M*
69f ••••P
09/30/92
4,276.466
COLUMBUS OH 43201
NFT INC.
409 CORPORATE CIRCLE
GOLDEN CO 80401
SHALL BUS FP PRESNELL 09/24/90 68000145 AS
SERVICES 65 HCCALLISTER 83/27/93 D000873R1 F999
CHEM ANAL SVCS FOR INORGANICS!SET-ASIDE OR D000461R1) C
72F
03/27/93
cis r
BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
I I
-------
II
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE 10
C-PC SPANS 65«65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST
EFFORT PC
PROJECT TITLE
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
C-CLA9S REPRESENTATIVE
PROO/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM HAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS . HAX.POTVAL
NATIONAL PATENT DEV. CORP
202 PERRY PARKNAY
GAITHERSBUR6 MD 20077
KEYSTONE ENVIRON RESOURCES
3PECTRIX-HOU3TON
3911 FORDREN
HOUSTON TX 77063
KEYSTONE ENVIRON RESOURCES
3PECTRIX/MONROEVILLE DIV
440 COLLEGE PARK OR.
HONROEVILLE PA 15146
DATACHEM, INC
520 NAKARA NAY
SALT LAKE CITY UT 04100
COMPUCHEM LAB INC
3300 EAST CHAPEL HALL
NELSON HIGHWAY
RTP NC 27709
ENSECO INC
ROCKY MT LAB
4955 YARROH ST
ARVADA CO 00002
SOUTHEASTERN CAPITOL CORP
3020 159TH AVE NE
REDMOND HA 90052
LAUCKS TESTING LABORATORIES
940 8 HARNEY
SEATTLE HA 90100
IOMA, UNIV OF
HYGIENIC LAB
IOWA CITY IA 52242
LANCASTER LABS INC.
2425 NEH HOLLAND PIKE
LANCASTER PA 17601
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
ID000461R1I
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
(D000461R1)
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
10000461R1)
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
(D000461R1)
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
D000461R1
FP SIMMONS
65 CARASEA
FP PRESNELL
65 KURD
FP SIltlONS
65 CARASEA
FP PRESNELL
65 MCALLISTER
FP BERND
65 FRIBU3H
LARGE BUS FP PRESNELL
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER
D000463R1 - ORGANIC* ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH
D000463R1 - OR6ANICS ANALYSIS
SHALL BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
NON/PRFT UNIV FP BERND
SERVICES 65 BAMCERT
0000463R1-ORGANICS ANALYSIS
SHALL BUS FP SIMMONS
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
09/25/90 60000146 AS 72F
09/24/93 D001026R1 F999
X
09/25/90 60000147 AS 72F
03/25/93 0001020R1 F999
X
09/25/90 60000140 AS 72F
03/24/93 0001027R1 F999
X
09/25/90 60000149 AS 72F
03/24/93 0001025R1 F999
X
09/25/90 60000150 AS 72F
03/24/93 0001054R1 F999
X
09/20/90 60000151 AS 72F
03/27/93 D001057R1 F999
X
09/20/90 60000152 AS 72F
03/20/93 D001063R1 F999
X
09/20/90 60000153 AS 7tF
03/20/93 0001055R1 F999
A
09/20/90 60000154 AS 72F
03/27/93 D001920R1 F999
X
09/20/90 60000155 AS 72F
03/27/93 0001060R1 F999
A
03/24/93
471.200
OV2S/93
551.760
OV24/9S
§91.760
03/24/93
522.720
03/24/93
522.720
03/27/93
1.570.720
OV20/93
1.005.740
03/20/93
1.074.400
03/27/93
1.914.000
03/27/93
1.940.400
CIS DATA BASE AS OF OZ/27/92
EK/1
-------
11
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
II
C-PC SPANS 65«65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE
EFFORT
PROJECT TITLE
COST
PC
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
S8AREA AREAS riAX.POTVAL
INDUSTRIAL • ENVIRON ANALYST
PO BOX 12046
RES TRI PARK NC 27709
SOUTHEASTERN CAPITOL CORP
625B CLYDE AVE
MOUNTAINVIEH CA 94043
RECRA ENVIRONMENTAL
6320 GUILFORD RO BLD6 E
COLUMBIA MD 21046
COMPUCHEM LAB INC
3308 EAST CHAPEL HALL
NELSON HIGHHAY
RTP NC 27709
SOUTHEASTERN CAPITOL CORP
3020 6601 PRESS DR
NEH ORLEANS LA 70126
EN9ECO. INC
205 ALEHISE BROOK PKNY
CAMBRIDGE HA 02136
ENSECOt INC
2455 INDUSTRIAL BLVD
SACRAMENTO CA 95691
EN3ECO, INC
2200 COTTONTAIL LN
SOMERSET NJ 08673
I T ANALYTICAL SERVICES
165 FIELOCRCST AVE
EDISON NJ 08837
CHEH NEST ANALYTICAL LABS
600 U. NORTH MARKET BLVD
SACREMENTO CA 95634
ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT SUPPORT
9514 HIDHOOD RD
SILVER SPRING MD 20910
SMALL BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH
0000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 69 BANKERT
D000463R1-ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP SIMMONS
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
CHAM.ANALYTICAL SERVICES. ORGANICS
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP PRESNELL
SERVICES 65 KURD
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 KURD
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 BANKERT
D000463R1-ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP SIMMONS
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP SIMMONS
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
0000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 BANKERT
D000463R1-ORGANICS ANALYSIS
SMALL BUS CPFF RICHARDS
SERVICES 65 NILLIAMS
TECH.SUPP. OF OTTRS/ORD
09/18/90 66000156 AS
03/27/93 D001856R1 F999
A
09/26/90 66000197 AS
03/27/93 0001921R1 F999
X
09/26/90 68000158 AS
03/27/93 D000463R1 F999
X
09/28/90 68000159 AS
03/26/93 D001656R1 F999
X
09/28/90 66000160 A3
03/27/93 0001662R1 F999
X
09/28/90 68000161 AS
02/27/94 D001861R1 F999
X
09/28/90 66000162 AS
03/27/93 0001922R1 F999
X
09/26/90 66000163 AS
03/27/93 D001864R1 F999
X
09/26/90 66000164 AS
03/27/93 D001659R1 F999
X
09/28/90 66000166 AS
03/27/93 D001914R1 F999
X
09/30/90 66000171 C
09/30/93 D000479M1 R421
C
72F
72F 727
72F
72F
72F
72F
72F
72F
72F
72F
266 604 267
03/27/
3.649,120
03/27/93
4.367.9*0
03/27/93
C,772.000
OV26/93
9.931.630
03/27/93
4.419.360
02/27/94
1.976,760
03/21
1.976,720
03/27/93
1.976.720
03/27/93
1,848,000
03/27
1.911.310
09/30/93
1.182,591
CIS
BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
11
02/27/92
CNBR
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A6ENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST C-PC SPANS 65«65:
PAGE It
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE
EFFORT
PROJECT TITLE
COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
PC PROJECT OFFICER
EFF-OATE CONTRACT C-CUSS REPRESENTATIVE
EXP-OATE RFP-NBR PROO/SRVC FUNDINB PROGRAM MAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
COMPUTER SCI CORP
SYSTEMS DIV
6565 ARLINBTON BLVD
FALLS CHURCH VA £2046
RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE
P 0 BOX 12194
RSRCH TRI PK HC 27709
REVET ENVIRONMENTAL
365 PLANTATION ST.
HORCHESTER HA 01605
TECHNICAL RESOURCES INC
3202 TOMER OAKS BLVD
SUITE 200
ROCKVILIE MD 20052
AMER ANALYTICAL ft TECHNICAL
SERVICES. INC.
PO BOX 366
CUSHING OK 74023
RESEARCH « EVALUATION ASSOC
100 EUTOPA OR
SUITE 590
CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
NYTEST ENVIRONMENTAL
60 SEAVIEM BLVD
PORT WASHINGTON NY 11050
RADIAN CORP
8501 MO-PAC BLVD
P.O. BOX 201060
AUSTIN TX 76720
HEMEBRANE TECH ft RSRCH INC
1360 HILLOH RO
MENLO PARK CA 94025
NYTEST ENVIRONMENTAL
60 SEAVIEM BLVD
PORT MASHINGTON NY 11050
LARGE BUS CPAF SALIBY
SERVICES 65 SCHUR
NCPD TECH.SUPPORT SERVICES
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF LLOYD
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 VONLEHHDEN
WML.A3SUR.FOR ENV.POLL.MONITORING- VII
SMALL BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 KURD
CHEM.ANAL.SVCS.FOR OR6ANICS I0000463R1)
01/02/91 60010003 C
09/30/92 D000171N1 R703
X
01/29/91
09/30/92
01/06/91
06/07/93
66010009 C
D000634H1 F999
X
66010013 AS
D100277R1 F999
A
SMALL BUS CPFF MEANT 04/16/91 66010022 C
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 HUNG 09/30/92 0000276L1 F999
GEN.RES.ft DEV.SUPP.FOR OFFICE OF ENV.EN6.ft TECH.DEM. C
SMALL BUS
SERVICES
FP
65
BERND
KURD
03/26/91
09/26/93
(D000462R1) CHEM.ANAL.SERVICES-INORGANICS
SMALL BUS CPFF SIMMONS. J.L.
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BEASLEY
PROV.OF TRANSPORTATION IN SUPP.OF
EPA
06/01/91
05/31/95
(OSMERI
LARGE BUS FP BERND 05/15/91
SERVICES 65 MCCALUSTER 11/14/93
CHEM.ANAL.SVCS.-HIGH CONCENT.INORGANIC ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS CPFF FARMER 05/31/91
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 6AGNON 09/30/92
EFF/EMISS.EVAL.ft CONTROL TECH.SURVEYS ft EVALS
66010024 AS
D100703R1 F999
X
66010029 S
D100215R1 V999
0
66010030 AS
D100009R1 F999
X
66010031 C
D000693L1 AH91
X
SMALL BUS
RESEARCH ft
SBIR-II
FP
DEV 65
LLOYD
CAREY
LARGE BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
CHEM.ANAL.SERVICES FOR ORGANIC*
06/27/91 66010072 C
11/27/92 0101196m AH11
C
07/15/91 66010079 AS
01/14/94 D10045SR1 F999
X
42F 54M 54E
60E
72F
62V 62F
72F
72F
72F
62F
C6T
72F
09/34/9*
10.919.677
09/30/94
9.551.615
06/07/93
2.027.520
09/30/93
5.957,902
09/26/93
1.001.760
05/31/95
2,455.362
11/14/93
250.600
05/31/94
5.397,090
Il/t7/9t
150.000
01/14/94
313.500
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
C-PC SPANS *5«6S:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
DATACHEM, INC
960 N LEZOY DRIVE
SALT LAKE CITY UT 64108
MCCOY t MCCOY
85 EAST NOEL AVENUE
MADISONVILLE. KY 42431
INDUSTRIAL t ENVIRON ANALYST
200 MONROE TURNPIKE
MONROE CT 06468
COMPUCHEM CORPORATION
3308 EAST CHAPEL HALL
NELSON HIGHHAY
RTP NC 27709
ENVIROSYSTEMS, INC.
9300 RUMSEY ROAD
COLUMBIA MD 21045
MADSMORTH TESTING LABS
1600-4TH ST., S.E.
CANTON OH 44701
PACE LABORATORIES
9608 LARIET BOULEVARD
LENEXA KS 66219
DATA GENERAL CORP.
ROUTE 9
SOUTHBORO HA 01772
SOUTHWEST RSRCH INST
8500 CULEBRA RD
P 0 BOX 26510
SAN ANTONIO TX 78284
PACE LABORATORIES
1710 DOUGLAS DRIVE N
MINNEAPOLIS MM 55422
TYPE COST
EFFORT PC
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS FP
SERVICES 65
CHEM ANAL SERVICES
LARGE BUS FP
SERVICES 65
CHEN ANAL SERVICES
LARGE BUS FP
SERVICES 65
CHEM ANAL SERVICES
LARGE BUS FP
SERVICES 65
CHEM ANAL SERVICES
SMALL BUS FP
SERVICES 65
CHEM ANAL SERVICES
SMALL BUS FP
SERVICES 65
CHEM ANAL SERVICES
SMALL BUS FP
SERVICES 65
CHEM ANAL SERVICES
LARGE BUS FP
SERVICES 65
CHEM ANAL SVCS FOR
NON/PRFT RSCH FP
SERVICES 65
CHEM ANAL SVCS FOR
SMALL BUS FP
SERVICES 65
CHEM ANAL. SERVICES
NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
BERND 06/06/91
MCCALLISTER 02/05/94
FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
BERND 07/1S/91
BARRON 01/14/94
FOR ORGANICS (D100455RH
BERND 07/15/91
HURD 01/14/94
FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1I
BERND 07/15/91
BARRON 01/14/94
FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
BERND 07/15/91
CARASEA 01/14/94
FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
BERND 07/15/91
MCCALLISTER 01/14/94
FOR ORGANICS(D1004S5R1)
BERND 06/14/91
BANKERT 02/13/94
FOR ORGANICS (DI00455R11
BERND 07/15/91
MCCALLISTER 01/14/94
ORGANICS ID100455R1)
BERND 07/31/91
HURD 02/28/94
ORGANICS (D100455R1)
BERND 07/31/91
MCCALLISTER 01/30/94
FOR ORGANICS ID100455R1)
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68010060
D101655R1
68010081
D101656R1
68010082
D101657R1
68010083
D101658R1
68010084
D101661R1
66010065
0101862R1
68010086
D101663R1
68010087
D101866R1
680 10088
D101902R1
68010069
D101865R1
C-CLA3S REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
A
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
mmm
02/05/94
0
••••ol
.01/14/94
0
••••I
01/14/94
1.779,3*0
•••M
01/14/94
7,616.960
•••fe
01/14/94
1.900,910
••M
01/14/94
1,911.3*0
•••
02/1V94
t. 0*9, 7*0
oflHHi
01/14/94
2.136.400
•••••
02/26/94
10.406.660
•w
01/30/94
t. 106. 960
cis r
1ASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
02/Z7/9Z
CHBR SORT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
PAGE
ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65"*5:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
I T ANALYTICAL SERVICES
17605 FABRICA MAY
CERRITOS CA 90701
I T ANALYTICAL SERVICES
11499 CHESTER ROAD
CINCINNATI OH 43246
INDUSTRIAL 1 ENVIRON ANALYST
PO BOX 12846
RES TRI PARK NC 17709
ECOLOGY • ENVIRONMENT INC
366 PLEASANT VIEN DRIVE
BUFFALO CORPORATE CENTER
LANCASTER NY 14066
I T ANALYTICAL SERVICES
5615 HIDDLEBROOK PIKE
KNOXVILLE TN 37921
SOUTHEASTERN CAPITOL CORP
3620 6801 PRESS OR
NEH ORLEANS LA 70126
PACIFIC ANALYTICAL INC
1969 PALOMAR OAKS
HAY SUITE B
CARLSBAD CA 92000
SONOTECHi INC.
575 TRAVIS STREET. NH
ATLANTA 6A 30316
PRECISION COMBUSTION INC
25 SCIENCE PARK
N
EM HAVEN CT 06511
GANNETT FLEMING. INC.
PO BOX 1963
HARRISBUR6 PA 17105
TYPE COST
EFFORT PC
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
CHOI ANAL
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
CHAN ANAL
SMALL BUS
SERVICES
CHEM ANAL
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
CHEM ANAL
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
CHEM ANAL
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
CNEM ANAL
SMALL BUS
SERVICES
CHEN ANAL
SHALL BUS
RESEARCH
SBIR-II
SMALL BUS
RESEARCH
SBIR-II
FP
65
SERVICES
FP
65
SERVICES
FP
65
SERVICES
FP
65
SERVICES
FP
65
SERVICES
FP
65
SVCS FOR
FP
65
SERVICES
FP
1 DEV 65
FP
t DEV 65
LARGE BUS CPFF
TECHNICAL SRVC 65
EIS 1 NEPA RELATED
NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
BERND
BANKERT
FOR ORGANICS
BERND
HCCALLISTER
FOR ORGANICS
BERND
BARRON
FOR ORGANICS
07/31/91
•2/13/94
(D100455R11
08/12/91
02/11/94
(D100455R1!
07/15/91
01/14/94
ID100455R1)
BERND 06/02/91
CARASEA 02/01/94
FOR ORGANIC3(D100455R1I
BERND
BARRON
FOR ORGANICS
07/15/91
01/14/94
(D100455R1)
BERND 06/06/91
KURD 02/05/94
ORGANICS (D100455R1)
BERND
BANKERT
FOR ORGANICS
LLOYD
CAREY
LLOYD
CAREY
06/16/91
02/15/94
(D100455R1)
08/26/91
08/26/92
09/12/91
09/12/93
HOUSER 09/27/91
DAN MELKER 09/30/92
STUDY - REGION III
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
66010090
D101864R1
66010091
D101667R1
66010692
D101666R1
66010093
0101669R1
66010094
D101870R1
66010097
D101871R1
66010096
D101672R1
66010101
D102196M1
66010103
D100002H1
68010132
0100321N1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
X
C
AH11
C
C
AH11
C
C
F099
X
72F
72F
72F
72F
72F
72F
72F
26T
26T
030 03S 03X
03U OJX
HAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
02/13/94
2.106.7CO
02/11/94
2.142.160
01/14/94
2.233.440
02/01/94
2.236.720
01/14/94
2. 320. MO
OK/15/94
202.486
02/15/94
2.632.080
06/26/92
149.942
09/12/93
150. •••
09/30/94
2,588,546
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 03/27/92
EK/1
-------
11
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
15
C-PC SPANS 65»69:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
ICF INC
9300 LEE HHY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
EH PECHAN I ASSOC INC.
55)7 HEMPSTEAD HAY
SPRINGFIELD VA 22151
ENVIRON HEALTH RSRCHCTESTING
2514 REGENCY RD
LEXINGTON KY 40503
LOCKHEED ENGINEERING SCI CO
TWO CORPORATE PLAZA
2625 BAY AREA BLVD.
HOUSTON TX 77058
REGIONAL TRANSP. DISTRICT
1600 BLAKE ST.
DENVER CO 80202
IIT RSRCH INST
10 HEST 35TH ST
CHICAGO IL 60616
COMPUTER BASED SYSTEM INC
2750 PROSPERITY DR.
FAIRFAX VA 22031
SRA TECHNOLOGIES. INC
4700 KING ST. SUITE 300
ALEXANDRIA VA 22302
MATH TECH INC.
P 0 BOX 2392
PRINCETON NJ 08540
ICF INC
1850 K ST NM
SUITE 950
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-OATE CONTRACT
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE RFP-NDR
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPAF PRESNELL
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BEASLEY
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ASSISTANCE TEAMS -
SHALL BUS CPFF LLOYD
RESEARCH t DEV 69 L. JONES
MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATION ANALYSES AND
SMALL BUS CPAF HOUSER
SERVICES 65 OR MICHAEL MATERS
09/27/91 68010139
09/39/92 D100107R1
ZONE II
09/20/91 68010140
09/30/92 D10053SH1
SERVICES
09/30/91 68010148
09/30/92 D100085M1
ON-SITE/OFF-SltE RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR GTD
LARGE BUS CPAF BERND
SERVICES 65 BEASLEY
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICE ASSISTANCE TEAMS -
STA/LOCL OTHR FP VICKIE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 CHRISTOPHER HARTINEZ
ECO BUS PASSES FOR REGION 8 PERSONNEL
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF HOUSER
RESEARCH t DEV 69 MULICK
09/30/91 68010158
09/30/92 D001870R1
ZONE 1
01/15/92 68020008
D200104N1
12/09/87 68080001
09/30/92 DU87B109
LAB DEV. * FIELD TEST.OF ENV.MONIT. METHODS
SMALL BUS CPAF MEANT
SERVICES 65 SELLERS
TNI DOCUMENT PROCESSING CENTER
SHALL BUS CPAF LLOYD
RESEARCH 1 DEV 65 EVERSON
03/01/88 68D80013
09/30/92 D800223L1
04/21/88 68080017
09/30/92 DU87B235
SUPP.SERV.FOR ANAL.* BIOCHEH.EPIDEH. STUDIES
LARGE BUS CPFF HINTON
SERVICES 65 LONG, J.
MARKET • ECON.ANAL.OF NEH t EXIST. CHEM.ft
LARGE BUS CPFF MEANT
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 AUGU3TYNIAK
ECONOMICS SUPPORT FOR REGULATORY ACTIONS
09/28/88 68080087
06/30/92 D800159L1
INDUST. SECTORS
09/30/88 68080116
03/31/92 D800161L1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE ••••••
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM HAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
C
F999
X
S
R409
C
C
F999
C
C
8999
X
S
V212
X
C
AH92
X
IS
R307
D
LS
AN11
D
C
F106
X
C
F106
X
04T 72F 07M MH-V
09/30/9S
69,370.613
265 ••••)
09/30/94
2,666,931
*1H ••••M
09/30/96
26,191,660
01R 72F •••••)
09/30/9S
6,348.744
08A oae 4HV
It/31/92
81.125
60E <•••••
09/30/92
4.914.970
69M •*•••
09/30/92
23,799. 083
61H ••••V
09/30/92
2,881.327
69T ••••
06/30/92
1.869.909
69T 79E 69A •••••
69T 69H 75E 03/31/92
5.176.990
CIS
BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
OZ/Z//
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE 16
C-PC SPANS 65«65i
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST
EFFORT PC
PROJECT TITLE
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
C-CLASS
PROO/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
HAX.EXP
HAX.POTVAL
SYRACUSE UNIV RSRCH CORP
MERRILL IN
UNIV HEIGHTS
SYRACUSE NY 13210
RESEARCH t EVALUATION ASSOC
109 CONNOR OR
SUITE 2101
CHAPEL HILL NC 27514
HAN TECHNOLOGY
3342 INTERNATIONAL PARK OR
ATLANTA GA 30316
MITCHELL SYSTEMS CORP
1300 NEM YORK AVE NH
SUITE ZOOM
WASHINGTON DC 20005
ICF INC
9300 LEE HHY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
INTERGRATED LABRATORY SYSTEM
P.O. BOX 13501
RSRCH TRI PK NC 27709
RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE
P 0 BOX 12194
RSRCH TRI PK NC 27709
SIGMA RESEARCH CORP
234 LITTLETON RD
SUITE 2E
HESTFORD MA 01086
AMER. SCIENTIFIC INTL. INC
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
DATACHEM. INC
520 HAKARA MAY
SALT LAKE CITY UT 04100
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF FARMER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 HELM
TEST RULES SUPPORT SERVICES
09/90/00 60000117 C
09/30/92 0000960L1 F106
X
SMALL BUS CPFF MEANT 09/30/00 60000110 8
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 THOMSON 09/30/92 0000767L1 F401
PEER REV. « «ML.ASSUR-TE3T RULES DEV.3ECT.4 OF TSCA D
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT 01/20/09
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH 07/19/92
CHEMICAL ANAL.SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (M002036D11
SMALL BUS CPFF LLOYD 03/17/09
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 6ANT 09/30/93
SEL.ASST.IN DESIGN « CONDUCT OF ORD MGMT.ISSUES
60090034 AS
D900536R1 F999
X
60090040 S
D900047H1 R599
D
LARGE BUS CPAF BERND
SERVICES 65 BARON
QUALITY ASSURANCE TECHNICAL SUPPORT
SMALL BUS CPFF LLOYD
RESEARCH • DEV 65 BENSON
QA SUPPORT - HERL
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF LLOYD
RESEARCH « DEV 65 BENSON
9.A.SUPPORT FOR HERL
SMALL BUS CPFF PRESNELL, V.
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ECKHOfF
2ND AMARD UNDER 0001153N1
02/15/09 60090041 C
02/15/93 M00271201 F999
X
04/05/09 60090050 S
09/30/93 D900055H1 H199
D
00/11/09 60090051 C
00/10/92 D001275M1 R599
X
09/12/09 60090067 C
09/30/92 D901360N1 F101
E
SMALL BUS CPFF MADE 00/10/09
SERVICES 65 GRINDER 09/30/93
LOCAL AREA NETWORK ADMIN I PC TECH. SOPP.
LARGE BUS FP PRESNELL 09/07/09
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER 03/07/92
CHEM.ANALYTICAL SVCS FOR ORGANICS (0900206R1I
60090075 S
D900210M1 R400
D
60090004 AS
0902510R1 F999
X
69A
69A
72F
265
72F
61H
61H
530
63M
72F
09/M/W
1,962.266
09/30/92
1.203.039
07/19/92
t, lit,000
09/30/93
6,130.299
02/14/92
11.493.174
09/30/93
1,055,762
00/11/94
1.500,690
09/30/92
454,627
09/30/93
1.009.26*
03/07/92
250.060
CIS DATA BASE AS OF OZ/Z7/9Z
EK/1
I I
-------
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A6ENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEN
PAGE 17
CNBR SORT
ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65«65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
COLUMBIA ANALYTICAL SERVICES
1152 3RD AVE
LONGVIEN HA 98632
COMPUCHEtl LAB INC
3306 EAST CHAPEL HALL
NELSON HI6HMAY
RTP NC 27709
EN9ECO INC
ROCKY NT LAB
4955 YARROW ST
ARVADA CO 00002
AtlER. SCIENTIFIC INTL. INC
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
VERSAR INC
•GEN TECHNOLOGIES OIV
6650 VERSAR CENTER
SPRINGFIELD VA 22151
ASK ASSOCIATES
901 KENTUCKY
SUITE 106
LAURENCE KS 66044
EASTERN RESEARCH GROUP INC
6 MHITTEHORE ST
ARLINGTON MA 02174
VIAR I CO
112 SO PITT ST
ALEXANDRIA VA £2314
NORTHERN LABORATORIES ENG
INEERIN6 INC.
2400 CUMBERLAND DR
VALPARAISO IN 46363
CLEMENT ASSOC INC
9300 LEE HHY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH
CHEM. ANALYTICAL SVCS FOR INORGANICS
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH
CHAN. ANALYTICAL SVCS FOR INORGANICS
LARGE BUS FP PRESNCLL
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER
EFF-DATE CONTRACT
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR
09/07/89 66090065
03/07/92 D902519R1
(D900206R1)
09/07/69 66090066
03/07/92 D902520R1
(D900206R1 1
09/29/69 66090090
03/29/92 D903032R1
CHEM. ANALYTICAL SVCS FOR INORGANICS! D900207R1 1
SMALL BUS CPFF RICHARDS
SERVICES 65 DELLARCO
TECH. SUPP. FOR ENV.ft HUMAN EXP.MONIT
LARGE BUS CPFF MEANT
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 KAHN
09/06/89 68090094
09/30/93 D900445M1
.ft MOO. RES. PROG.
09/27/89 680*0099
09/30/92 D900184N1
SUPPORT FOR REGULATORY DOCUMENT PRODUCTION
SMALL BUS CPFF SALIBY
SERVICES 65 BAILEY
REAS DATA ENTRY SUPPORT FOR REGION
SMALL BUS CPFF MEANT
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 MILLER
TASK FORCE ON ENV. CANCER ft HEART I
LARGE BUS CPAF SIMMONS, J.L.
SERVICES 65 MILTSHIRE, PAT
OPER.OF CONTRACT LAB -SMO OFFICE
SMALL BUS FP PRESNELL
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER
06/24/69 66090132
08/24/92 D901092N1
VII
09/29/69 68090133
09/30/94 D600769M1
LUNG DISEASE
09/19/89 66090135
09/18/94 D900003R1
09/13/69 68090153
03/13/92 D902521R1
CHEH. ANAL. SVCS. FOR INORGANICS (0900205R1I
LARGE BUS CPFF NOUSER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 RILEY
HEALTH i RISK ASSESS. SUPP. FOR TOX
09/29/89 66D90158
09/30/92 D600963N1
1C AIR POLL.
C -CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
AS 72F
F999
A
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
S 60U
AH21
0
C 33X
T013
X
LS 07M
F099
C
C 61X
AZ11
C
C 72F
FW9
X
AS 72F
F999
C
C 53C
F103
X
MAX.EXP
HAX.POTVAL
MB
03/07/92
274,540
•••ft
•3/07/91
282,400
•••
OV29/92
707, S20
OBWi
09/30/93
3,679,960
«•••
•9/30/92
370,115
<•••)
08/24/92
276,669
•••B
•9/30/94
2,329,634
09/18/94
143,601,171
•mm
03/1V92
359.040
09/30/92
630,903
cis r
BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
02/2?.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION MtiENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
16
C-PC SPANS 65«65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
VER3AR INC.
6850 VER3AR CENTER
SPRINGFIELD VA 22151
3 COHEN t ASSOCIATES, INC
1311 DOLLY MADISON BLVD
MCLEAN VA 22102
NESTAT INCORPORATED
11600 NEBEL ST
ROCKVILLE MD 20892
GRANTS ASSOCIATES
308 LANIDEX PLAZA
PARSIPPANY NJ 0705*
GANNETT FLEMING, INC.
PO BOX 1963
HARRISBURG PA 17105
LOUIS PROVENZANO INC.
100 HEST BROADWAY
NEH YORK NY 10013
DANIEL DENNIS t COMPANY
TYPE COST
EFFORT PC
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS CPAF
TECHNICAL SRVC 65
BXP. ASSESSMENT 3 FOR
SMALL BUS CPAF
RESEARCH • DEV 65
3UPP.FOR IONIZING t
LARGE BUS CPFF
TECHNICAL SRVC 65
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
FARMER
BRYANT
TOXIC SUBSTANCES
HOUSER
KAHN
EFF-DATE
EXP-OATE
09/30/69
09/30/92
11/03/69
09/30/92
CONTRACT
RFP-NDR
66090166
D900526L1
66090170
D900367N1
NONIONIZIN6 RADIATION PREGRAMS
HOUSER
3TERRETT
09/30/69
09/30/92
66090174
D901066L1
GEN.STAT.SUPP.FOR ASSESS. OF TOXIC SUBS.
SMALL BUS TM
TECHNICAL SRVC 65
RIVERSO
LIVINGSTON
09/14/90
09/13/92
66R00003
000072242
PUBLIC NOTICE ADVERTISING FOR REG. II
LARGE BUS TM
SERVICES 65
NEPA STUDIES - REG.
SMALL BUS FP
SERVICES 65
INDOOR PARKING SVCS
SMALL BUS TM
MUELLER
IV
RIVERSO
KAUFMAN
07/18/91
12/31/92
10/01/91
09/30/92
66R 10004
D000695Q4
66R10009
D101371Q2
FOR REG. II VEHICLES
RIVERSO
01/03/69
66R90002
C-CLAS3
PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
C
F106
A
C
AH21
A
C
F106
X
S
R701
0
C
B510
X
A
S299
A
S
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
69C
33X
69E
02K
36H
567
356
•*••••»
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
•MM»
09/30/92
9.667,039
«•"•**
09/M/9f
20,554,771
09/M/92
2,216,671
••M
09/13/92
160.0001
tJBHB
12/31/93
•
mmm
09/30/92
4*. 060
oMM
COPLEY PLACE
100 HUNTINGTON AVE
BOSTON MA 02116
GANNETT FLEMING ENVIRON
ENGINEERING INC
P.O.BOX 1963
HARRISBURG PA 17105
HEMLETT-PACKARO CO
M 120 CENTURY RO
PARAMUS NJ 07652
SUFFOLK COUNTY MATER
AUTHORITY
SUNRISE HHY ft POND ROAD
OAKDALE NY 11769
HAOTZLOUSKY
12/31/92 DU672094
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING AUDIT SERVICES
R709
0
LARGE BUS TM RIVERSO
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 HARGROVE
PREP.OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STUDIES
LARGE BUS FP KASTNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 GOLDBERG
MAINTENANCE OF HP LAB EQUIPMENT
STA/LOCL OTHR FP MURPHY
SERVICES 65 VOGELSANG, N
SUFFOLK COUNTY HATER
01/27/69 66R90003 C
09/11/92 D60006M2 F110
X
10/01/69 66R90006 S
09/30/92 D90116392 J099
X
06/01/90 66302006 S
02/26/93 H062035F2 SI14
X
62C
02K
2AK
12/31/92
361.589
04/30/92
3,204,736
09/30/92
324,623
02/26/93
4,500.000
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
I I
-------
11
02/27/92
CNBR
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST C-PC SPANS 65«65:
PAGE
19
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATI CONTRACT C-CU33 REPRESENTATIVE
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE RFP-NBR PROD/SIIVC FUNDING PROGRAM
PROJECT TITLE SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
0. H. MATERIALS. INC.
P. 0. BOX SSI
FINDLAY OH 45840
HASTE MANAGEMENT INC
•CHEMICAL NASTE MANAGEMENT
900 JORIE BLVD
OAK BROOK IL 60521
OHM REMEDIATION SERV CORP
16406 U.S. ROUTE
224 EAST
FINDLAY OH 45839-055
ENVIRONMENTAL TECH INC
P 0 BOX 1236
3705 SAUNDER9 AVE
RICHMOND VA 23277
OHM REMEDIATION SERV CORP
16406 U.S. ROUTE
224 EAST
FINDLAY OH 45839-055
HESTINGHOUSE HAZTECH INC
5280 PANOLA INDUSTRIAL BLVD
DECATUR GA 30035
FOUR SEASONS INDUST SERV
3107 SOUTH ELM-EUGENE
GREENSBORO NC 27416
ENVIRONMENTAL TECH INC
P 0 BOX 1236
3705 SAUNDER3 AVE
RICHMOND VA 23277
TANS CONSULTANTS INC
655 3RD AVE
NEH YORK NY 10017
TECHLAM, INC
14500 AVON PARKWAY
SUITE 300
CHANTILLY VA 22021
LARGE BUS FP ERICKSON
SERVICES 65 FORD
REMOVAL ACTION/SITE SPEC. CANTON.MS
LARGE BUS FP TRUDEAU
SERVICES 63 L. STAFFORD
TftO - REGION VII
09/26/90 68S04001 C
09/24/92 H086168F4 F108
X
09/30/90 68307005 A
09/29/94 M0901S2F7 F108
X
LARGE BUS CPAF JAMISON 06/30/91 68S14001 A
SERVICES 65 CAROL MONELL 06/29/92 N986104F4 F10A
EMERGENCY FIRST RESPONSE CLEAN UP SERVICES REGION IV X
SMALL BUS CPFF WALKER 06/17/91
SERVICES 65 BOTTS 08/16/92
EMERGENCY RESPONSE CLEAN-UP SERVICES
LARGE BUS CPFF MALKER 08/17/91
SERVICES 65 BOTTS 11/06/92
EMERGENCY RESPONSE CLEANUP SVCS FINDLAY. OH
68S14002 C
H086032F4 F108
X
68314003 C
M186116F4 F108
X
LARGE BUS CPFF MALKER
SERVICES 65 BOTTS
EMERGENCY RESPONSE CLEANUP SERVICES
08/17/91 68S14004 C
08/16/92 H186117F4 F108
X
LARGE BUS CPFF .JAMISON 08/17/91 68314005 C
SERVICES 65 BOTTS 08/31/92 H186118F4 F108
EMERGENCY RESPONSE CLEAN-UP SERVICES GREENSBORO. NC X
SMALL BUS CPAF MURPHY
SERVICES 65 RICHARD FETZER
REGION III EMERGENCY CLEANUP SERVICES
LARGE BUS CPAF HEAVER
ARCHITECT/EN6 65 ALVI
ARCS AHARD REGION II
01/31/92
01/30/93
68S23002 C
M284066F3 F108
A
SMALL BUS CPAF
SERVICES 65
NEIC-SUPPORT
OSBORNE
PAULA SMITH
02/01/89 68392001 C
02/01/99 H982004F2 C214
X
11/16/89 68M00001 C
09/30/92 M901275A3 R421
A
4 AD
7AM
040 4AD
040 4AD
040 4AD
040 4AO
040 4AD
3A3 033
02K
50H
09/30/
1,200.000
06/29/96
26.465.195
22.329.620
08/16/96
23.228.090
08/16/96
24.18*.729
08/16/96
23,933.47*
01/30/97
147,987,744
OZ/01>
63.270,972
09/30/
34,325,000
CIS 01
iSE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
02/27/V2
ENVIRONHENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE 20
C-PC SPANS 65"65i
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE
EFFORT
PROJECT TITLE
COST
PC
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
EFF-OATE
EXP-DATE
CONTRACT
RFP-NDR
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVC CUM.OBL6S
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM ItAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS tUX.TOTVAL
IBM CORP
FEDERAL SYSTEMS DIV
10100 FREDERICK PIKE
GAITHERSBURG MD 20760
MITRE CORP
HESTGATE RSRCH PARK
MCLEAN VA 22102
ICF INC
9300 LEE HMY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
SCITRAN SCI TRANSLATION SVCS
M 6 FEITIS T/A
1402 E VALLEY RD/POBOX 5456
SANTA BARBARA CA 93108
AMERICAN COASTAL INDUSTRIES
4915 PROSPECTUS DRIVE
SUITE C
DURHAM NC 27713
ICF INC
9300 LEE HMY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
ICF INC
1050 K ST NM
SUITE 950
WASHINGTON OC 20006
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
0400 NESTPARK DR.
MCLEAN VA 22102
LARGE BUS FP LOVEROE
DATA PROCESSING 65 MATHIS
IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEM
AMER BUSINESS COMMUNIC.
5100 E. 119TH STREET
GRANDVIEN MO 64030
INC.
FED RESEARCH CPFF
MANAGEMENT CONS 65
NPL SUPPORT
SHARPE
ABERNATHY
LARGE BUS CPFF BAKER
SERVICES 65 RUBY DOUGLAS
OSM REGULATORY SUPPORT
SHALL BUS FP JONES
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 DAVE HOAOLEY
TRANSLATION OF TECHNICAL MATERIALS
SHALL BUS FP ROGERS
DATA PROCESSING 65 HORTON
INTERIM WORKSTATIONS
LARGE BUS CPFF BOYD
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 C. EN6LERT
INCREMENTAL FUNDING
LARGE BUS CPAF
TECHNICAL SRVC 65
UST SUPPORT
BAKER
JOSH BAYLSON
NANCY LOW « ASSOCIATES INC
5454 WISCONSIN AVENUE
SUITE 1500
CHEVY CHASE MD 20015
LARGE BUS CPAF DOUGLAS
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 KENT ANDERSON
HAZ. HASTE DISPOSAL REGS ft GUIDANCE
SMALL BUS FP ROGERS
DATA PROCESSING 65 BROOKS
VOICE MAIL
SHALL BUS CPFF BAKER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 DEBBIE RUTHERFORD
COMMUNICATION ft MARKETING SUPPORT
11/22/09 60M00005 C
09/30/95 M802625A3 7010
X
12/31/69 60H00000 S
12/31/92 M902144E2 C129
X
01/01/90 60H00009 C
12/02/93 H900043E1 F999
X
05/25/90 60M00019 C
09/30/92 M901370A2 9999
A
09/04/91 60M00021 9
09/30/92 N901404A3 7010
0
05/10/90 60M00022 C
04/30/93 N901076E1 R400
X
05/25/90 60M00024 C
05/24/92 M902945E1 F999
X
06/29/90 60N00025 C
12/31/92 H901234E1 F999
X
06/19/90 60H00026 3
09/30/95 N000477A3 7379
D
06/29/90 68M00030 C
05/24/92 N003705E1 F999
A
42F
72F
31R
644 69H
32P
75E
00M
31N 31T 31M
540
00M
09/M/99
70.lM.tM
12/31/92
19.000.00t
12/02/93
12.450.622
09/30/92
101.7*7
02/26/92
67.547,300
04/30/93
9,364,939
05/25/92
9.793,262
06/30/94
19.793.43S
09/30/99
4.300.000
06/20/93
3,973,416
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
11
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE II
C-PC SPANS 65»65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
PRC ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT.
1505 PLANNING RESEARCH OR
MCLEAN VA 22201
MCLEAN VA 22101
ROY F HESTON INC
1426 HESTON NAY
HEST CHESTER PA 19300
ECOLOGY ft ENVIRONMENT INC
199 SUGG RO
BUFFALO NY 14225
BOOZ- ALLEN t HAMILTON INC
BOOZ-ALLEH APPLIED RSRCH
4330 EAST HEST HIGHWAY
TYPE COST
EFFORT PC
PROJECT TITLE
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
LARGE BUS CPFF LAU
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 OEKAY
OSMER TRAINING SUPPORT
LARGE BUS CPAF HENE
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 HAWKINS
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TEAM (TAT) ZONE 1
LARGE BUS
MANAGEMENT
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
RCRA/SF HO1
CPAF
CONS 65
CPAF
65
rLINE
HENE
KAREN TOMIMATSU
6ALLION/HOU3EMA
THEA MCMANUS
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
07/09/90
07/08/94
10/01/90
09/30/92
10/01/90
09/30/92
09/14/90
09/30/93
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68M00034
W902250E1
68W00036
H000031C1
68H00037
H003769C3
68W00039
M900500E1
C-CLASS
PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
C
U009
X
C
C214
X
C
M08
X
C
P498
X
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
75K
72D
720
720 31M
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
«MMH
07/08/94
7.200.000
09/30/92
116.537.392
09/30/92
102. 109.297
09/30/93
17.393.029
BETHESDA HD 20014
INFO SYSTEMStNETHORKS CORP
10411 MOTOR CITY DRIVE
BETHESDA MD 20017
CHA. INC
4015 IBIS STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92103
COMPUTER SCI CORP
SYSTEMS OIV
6565 ARLINGTON BLVD
FALLS CHURCH VA 22046
CONTROL DATA CORP
11428 ROCKVILLE PIKE
ROCKVILLE MD 20852
FOXX 4 COMPANY
700 GOOOALL COMPLX
324 HEST 9TH STREET
CINCINNATI OH 45202
LOS GATOS CIRCUITS INC
634 GIBRALTER CT
MILPITAS CA 95035
SMALL BUS FP AMES
DATA PROCESSING 65 BRUCE ALMICH
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUPPORT
SMALL BUS FP KRAUSE
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 MAUREEN DELANEY
NAT'L RECRUITMENT MARKETING STRATEGY
09/26/90 68M00040 S
09/30/92 H903235A3 7010
0
09/30/90 68M00041 S
09/30/92 H002425A2 R799
ft DISPLAY DEVELOPMENT 0
LARGE BUS TM SCHLOSSER 09/28/90
DATA PROCESSING 65 CLINE 09/30/92
TECHNICAL ft OPERATIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES
LARGE BUS TM
DATA PROCESSING 65
MILLER
HAMMOND
10/04/90
09/30/92
FUNDING FOR THE SHARING SERVICES HITH CDC
SMALL BUS CPFF STERN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 SKAHN
CONSTRUCTION QUALITY MGMT.
09/28/90
09/27/92
IMPLEMENTATION
68W00043 C
H902404A3 R499
X
68W00049 S
H003008A3 R305
X
68W00050 8
M000921D1 R702
0
SMALL BUS FP JONES
SERVICES 65 LARRY STRATTON
MAINTENANCE ON CHROMATOGRAPH
10/01/90 68H00051 C
09/30/92 W002603A2 J099
A
540
85P
51C
42F
72E
50H
3,224.811
09/30/92
393.723
09/30/99
349.000.000
09/3
260.000
09/27/92
260,666
09/30/93
111.600
cis r
BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
22
C-PC SPANS 65«65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE
EFFORT
PROJECT TITLE
COST
PC
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
EFF-OATE
EXP-DATE
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
C-CLASS
PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
CUH.OBL63
HAX.EXP
HAX.POTVAL
BOOZ-ALLEN • HAMILTON INC
BOOZ-ALLEN APPLIED RSRCH
4330 EAST HEST HIGHWAY
BETHE30A MD 20014
OPRA INC.
P.O. BOX 727
200 RESEARCH DRIVE
MAHATTAN KS 66502
INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS. INC.
2067 MASSACHUSETTS AVE.
CAMBRIDGE MA 02140
THORNE ENVIRONMENTAL INC.
4125 E. LAPAU1A AV.
SUITE 300
ANAHEIM CA 92807
RESOLVE. WORLD WILDLIFE FUND
1250 24TH ST NH
THE CONSERVATION FOUND.
WASHINGTON DC 20037
ENVIRONMENTAL MSMT SUPPORT
9514 MIDWOCO RD
SILVER SPRING MD 20910
NESTAT INC
1650 RESEARCH BLVD
ROCKVILLE MD 20850
VIAR t CO
112 SO PITT ST
ALEXANDRIA VA 22314
RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE
P 0 BOX 12194
RSRCH TRI PK NC 27709
RESOURCE APPLICATIONS INC.
9291 OLD KEENE MILL ROAD
BURKE VA 22015
LARGE BUS CR BOYO
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 LOGAN
ANALYTICAL SUPPORT
03/01/91 68M10005 C
07/31/92 M100785D2 F199
X
LARGE BUS CPAF
MANAGEMENT CONS 65
GOLDBERG
MARLENE LEMRO
02/22/91
09/30/92
HEADWATERS TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT
60N10007 C
M903403E1 R409
X
SMALL BUS CPFF LUTZ 03/17/91 66N10009 C
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JAMES ZMERNEMAN 03/17/92 M002266A2 F999
SUPPORT SERVICES IN ECONOMIC ANALYSES OF CURRENT « FUTURE A
LARGE BUS CPAF LOVE LADY 02/26/91 60M100U C
SERVICES 65 LONGSTON 02/28/96 M100905C3 F108
FUNDING FOR THE ESTIMATED MGMT COSTS OF THE ERCS ZONE 4B X
LARGE BUS TM JONES 08/01/91
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 DALTON 07/31/94
REG/NE6 CONSULTATION DISPUTE RESOLUTION SUPPORT
60W10014 C
N001967A2 R799
X
SMALL BUS CPFF LAU
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 LIVINGSTONE
ANALYTICAL SUPPORT FOR 68-N1-0016
LARGE BUS CPFF HEARE
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 JOHN WARREN
STATISTICAL POLICY BRANCH SUPPORT
LARGE BUS CPFF LAU
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 NANCY LIVINGSTONE
ADVISORY AND ANALYTICAL ASSISTANCE
03/27/91 68H10016 C
03/26/95 N10109501 R408
E
06/11/91 68M10019 C
09/30/92 H902966A2 R499
X
06/25/91 68H10020 C
06/05/93 W00150301 R799
X
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF BOYD 07/01/91 68M10021 C
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 FRANCES HANAVAN 06/30/92 H002296D1 R799
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SUPPORT FOR SUPERFUND MANAGEMENT X
SMALL BUS CPFF
MANAGEMENT CONS 65
TAT 8(A)
MILLIARD
JENNIFER MALONEV
09/23/91
09/03/93
68N10022 C
H000441C3 8711
D
72C
81A
41C
720
410
72C
31R
72C
72C
75E
9.295.9SS
•2/21/96
18.tM.84S
83/17/94
10.941.058
•2/28/96
59,681.813
87/31/94
5,131.358
•V26/91
1,997.646
86/10/94
11,138,660
86/S8/94
7,563,004
11/38/95
12,841,686
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
CK/1
I I
-------
II
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
RESOURCE APPLICATIONS INC.
9291 OLD KEENE MILL ROAD
BURKE VA 22015
TYPE COST
EFFORT PC
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS CPFF
DATA PROCESSING 65
TAT 81 A)
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
KENNEDY
GREG HEI6EL
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
09/23/91
09/30/93
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
60M10023
M102244C3
C -CLASS
PROD/SRVC
SB AREA
C
8711
D
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
720
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
HAX.POTVAL
1 I/ JO/98
9.924,053
REIDEL ENVIRONMENTAL SRVCS
10207 EDISON AVENUE
CHESTERFIELD MO 63305
ORGANIZATIONAL DYNAMICS
1000 THOMAS JEFFERSON ST.
SUITE 606
WASHINGTON DC 20007
DIGITAL EQUIP CORP
0100 CORPORATEO DRIVE
LANDOVER MD 20705
DIGITAL EQUIP CORP
0100 CORPORATEO DRIVE
LANDOVER MO 20705
BROOKVALE (COMPUTERI ASSOC.
265 ODRT AVE.
HAUPPAUSE NY 11700
INTEGRATION TECHNOLOGIES
2745 HARTLAND ROAD
FALLS CHURCH VA 22043
INFORMATION DYNAMICS, INC.
7313 HOODMONT AVE.
BETHESDA MD 20814
TELEMARC INC.
12015 LEE JACKSON HHY
SUITE 500
FAIRFAX VA 22033
MARASCO NEKTON GROUP LTD
1600 HILSON BLVD.
SUITE 1200
ARLINGTON VA 22209
LARGE BUS CPAF EAVES
SERVICES 65 LARRY STAFFORD
EMERGENCY REMOVAL CONTRACT
LARGE BUS FP MURPHY
EQUIPMENT 65 KERRY-WEISS
LICENSE TO PRINT TQM COPYRIGHT MA
LARGE BUS FP AMES
DATA PROCESSING 65 DAVID M CLINE
ORD MODERNIZATION II
LARGE BUS FP AMES
DATA PROCESSING 65 DAVID M CLINE
ORD MODERNIZATION II
SMALL BUS FP AMES
DATA PROCESSING 65 DAVID M CLINE
ORD MODERNIZATION II
SMALL BUS FP AMES
DATA PROCESSING 65. DAVID M CLINE
ORD MODERNIZATION II
SMALL BUS TH FULTON
DATA PROCESSING 65 SCHMARZ
INOVATIVE ELECTRIC REPORTING
02/04/91 68H10035 C
02/0 V96 M900551C3 F108
X
04/26/91 60M10036 S
09/30/92 N101061A2 8742
X
09/23/91 60M10043 C
09/30/98 M102854A3 7010
X
09/23/91 68H10044 C
09/30/96 H102855A3 7010
X
09/2V91 68U1004S C
09/30/96 M102056A3 7010
A
09/23/91 68M10046 C
09/30/96 M102037A3 7010
A
09/24/91 68M1004B S
08/15/92 H101801A3 0306
0
SMALL BUS TM STERN 09/30/91
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FRANCES HANAVAN 09/30/92
LOGISTICAL « DOCUMENT PREPARATION SUPPORT FOR OERR
SMALL BUS CPFF ROBERT 12/18/91
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 FRANCES J HANAVAN 12/17/92
MANAGEMENT SUPPORT FOR SUPERFUND PROGRAM
68N10053 S
H100826D1 7389
D
68H20003 C
N100045D1 R799
C
720
85M
61H
55M
55M
55M
410
72C
72C
04/25/94
720.000
09/30/98
36.3S7.600
09/30/96
43,074,604'
09/30/96
41.693.827
09/30/94
1,560,848
12/10/95
8.934.093
CK fA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
02/27/V2
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
C-PC SPANS 65«65s
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C-CLASS
EXP-OATE RFP-NBR PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
TECHNOLOGY * MGMT. SERV.
20201 CENTURY BLVD.
GERMANTOWN MD 20674
EXTREL CORPORATION
240 ALPHA DRIVE
PITTSBURGH PA 15230 .
B E S ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
225 WYOMING AVE
KINGSTON PA 10704
GUARDIAN CONSTRUCTION CO.
1280 PORTER RD.
BEAR OE 19701
E C JORDAN COMPANY
PO BOX 7050
PORTLAND ME 04112
NU3 CORPORTATION
910 CLOPPER RD
6AITHERSBUR6 MD 20076
CH2M HILL
CH2M HILL CENTRAL
310 W WISCONSIN AVE
MILWAUKEE WI 53201
SMALL BUS CPFF ROBERT 12/16/91
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 JAMES T MCMASTER 12/17/92
MANAGEMENT SUPPORT FOT THE SUPERFUND PROGRAM
66W20005 C
W200433D1 R799
C
LARGE BUS FP SINK
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
THREE RIVERS AHAYTICAL ORGANIC3
SMALL BUS FP MURPHY. H
SERVICES 65 JARVELA
SITE SPECIFIC OBLIGATION
SMALL BUS FP MURPHY. MARIE
SERVICES 65 JARVELA
SITE SPECIFIC OBLIGATION
LARGE BUS FP LAU
SERVICES 65 FISK
INITIAL FUNDING -EC JORDAN
12/30/67 60M00020 AS
03/31/99 W60076001 F999
X
02/26/66 66M00020 C
02/26/92 W601745C3 F106
A
02/26/66 66W60030 C
02/25/92 N601746C3 Fltl
A
12/09/67 66N60032 AS
03/20/99 W60031101 F999
X
72C
72F
3AS 72D
3AS 72D
12/17/91
0.729.16*
•2/26/92
3,217.422
LARGE BUS CPAF OZER 01/01/66 66W60037 C
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 STEPHAINE DEL RE 12/31/97 M601662D1 C214
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION III - NUS X
LARGE BUS CPAF BAMFORD
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 BALLOTTI
FOREST WASTE DISPOSAL SITE
01/30/66 66W60040 C
01/31/96 M601349D1 F999
X
72E
72E
It/31/97
2J6.027.M5
•1/31/9*
227.222.913
NYTEST ENVIRONMENTAL
60 SEAVIEW BLVD
PORT WASHINGTON NY 11050
RECRA ENVIRONMENTAL
6320 GUILFORO RD BLDG E
COLUMBIA MD 21046
BLACK « VEATCH CONSULT EN6
1500 MEADOW LAKE PKWY
KANSAS CITY MO 64114
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
FP
65
SIMMONS,
CARASEA
J.L.
CHEMICAL ANALYTICAL SERVICES FOR OR6ANICS
02/29/66
05/29/99
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
FP
65
LAU
CARASEA
CHEMICAL ANALYTICAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS
02/29/68
06/09/99
66W60049 AS
M600935D1 F999
X
66N60051 AS
W60093301 F999
X
LARGE BUS CPAF MANZKE 04/06/66 66N60064 C
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 SUSAN HE3TON 04/26/96 HBO176101 F999
FUNDING/COMMUNITY RELATIONS SPRINGFIELD TOWNSHIP DUMP X
72F
7ZE
05/29/99
764.500
00/30/90
77*.100
- 04/20/90
220,160.211
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
11
02/27/92
ENVIRONMEKTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBB SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
25
C-PC SPANS 65««S:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C-CLASS
EXP-OATE RFP-NBR PROO/3RVC
SB AREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
CUH.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
HAX.POTVAL
ENVIRON HEALTH RSRCHtTESTINB
2514 REGENCY RD
LEXINGTON KY 40503
WESTERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE
PO BOX 3395-UNIVERSITY
LARAHIE MY 02071
N. H. ENGINEERING
611 CASCADE NEST PKNY SE
GRAND RAPIDS MI 49506
SCIENTEX CORP.
1655 NORTH MYER DRIVE
SUITE 400
ARLINGTON VA 22209
VIAR i CO
112 SO PITT ST
ALEXANDRIA VA 22314
PRC ENVIRON MGMT. INC.
303 E. HACKER OR. SUITE
CHICAGO IL 60601
500
ECOLOGY I ENVIRONMENT
195 SUGG RD
BUFFALO NY 14225
INC
ECOLOGY * ENVIRONMENT INC
195 SUGG RD
BUFFALO NY 14225
ROY F HESTON INC
1426 HESTON HAY
HEST CHESTER PA 19380
CH2M HILL
^SOUTHEAST INC
1941 ROLAND CLARK PLACE
RESTON VA 22091
SMALL BUS FP KNORR
SERVICES 65 STEVE JARVELA
REGION III SMALL BUSINESS CONTRACT
LARGE BUS FP LAU
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH
INITIAL FUNDING-HRI 236
LARGE BUS CPAF
ARCHITECT/ENG 65
ORIGINAL FUNDING
CONNER
SUSAN HESTON
SMALL BUS CPFF MENE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JOHN CUNNINGHAM
oi HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE TECH. SUPPORT
03/31/66 681100070 8
02/25/92 H802124C1 F108
0
03/15/88 68M80076 AS
03/30/92 M802048D2 F999
X
03/31/88 68H80079 C
03/30/98 H802440D1 C214
X
04/20/88 68H80080 S
04/19/92 H802480C2 F108
0
SMALL BUS TH LOVEROE 04/22/88 68H80063 C
DATA PROCESSING 65 TED HARRIS 09/30/92 HA87D075 R306
ANALYSIS. FEASIBILITY STUDIES SYST DESIGNS 4 SYS EVAL C
LARGE BUS CPAF CONNER 04/26/88
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KUSH 03/31/98
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION V - PRC
68M80084 C
M602858D1 C214
X
LARGE BUS CPAF OZER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 ROY SCHROCK
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES III
LARGE BUS CPAF HANZKE
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 SUSAN HESTON
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES V
05/06/88 68H80085 C
05/05/98 M802439D1 C214
X
05/06/88 68M80086 C
05/05/98 MB02438D1 C214
X
LARGE BUS CPAF MANZKE 06/01/88 68M80089 C
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 STEVE NATHAN 05/31/98 H802999D1 C214
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION V - MESTON X
LARGE BUS CPAF OZER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 DEL RE'
ARCS AHARD REGION III - CH2M HILL
06/03/88 68M80090 C
06/02/98 H803311D1 C214
X
72D 3AS
72F
72E
720
540
72E
72E
72E
72E
72E
16.000.008
03/30/92
928.400
03/30/98
58.347.645
04/19/91
1.100.173
03/30/93
33.87S.16S
OV31/96
211.963.366
62.606.266
05/86/98
60.655.304
05/31/96
222.164.330
06/OV96
233.265.045
CI!
A BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE 26
C-PC SPANS 65«65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C-CLASS
EXP-DATE RFP-NDR PROO/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
CUH.06L6S
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
BLACK * VEATCH CONSULT ENG
1500 MEADOW LAKE PKHY
KANSAS CITY HO
TETRA TECH
630 N R03EMEADE BLVO
PASADENA CA 91107
DONOHUE * ASSOCIATES
4736 N 40TH 3T
SHEBOY6AN HI 53063
LEONARD 6. BIRNBAUM ft CO
6205 FRANCONIA ROAD
ALEXANDRIA VA 22310
ENSITE. INC.
5119 S ROYAL ATLANTA OR
TUCKER 6A 30004
SPEAKING UP 1
750 VALLEJO ST. SUITE 301
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94123
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORP 5
530 WISCONSIN AVE
CHEVY CHASE ID 20615
CONCEPTUAL SYSTEMS INC 1
100 HAYNE AVE. 12TH FL
SILVER SPRING MD 20910
LABAT-ANDERSON
1111 L9TH ST. NORTH
ARLINGTON VA 22209
EBASCO SERVICES INC.
TWO WORLD TRADE CENTER
NEW YORK NY 10046
JACOBS ENG CO
521 S LAKE AVE
PASADENA CA 91109
LARGE BUS CPAF OZER
ARCHITECT/ENS 65 PIKE
ARCS REGION III
URGE BUS CPAF OZER
ARCHITECT/EN6 65 FRANCIS BURNS
ARCS AWARD REGION III - TETRA TECH
LARGE BUS CPAF BAMFORD
ARCHITECT/ENS 65 HESTON
ARCS AWARD REGION V - DONAHUE
SMALL BUS TN LUTZ
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 A. ORAND
AUDIT SERVICES - F
SMALL BUS FP JAMISON
SERVICES 65 NQNELL
ENSITE. INC. REGIONAL ERCS
SMALL BUS TN SCHLOSSER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 K. WRIGHT
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
LARGE BUS TN SCHLOSSER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 K. WRIGHT
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
SHALL BUS TM O3BORNE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 K. WRIGHT
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
SHALL BUS CPFF CUNNINGHAM
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 T. JOVER
IHPL. SUPP. FOR SARA. TITLE III.
LARGE BUS CPAF WEAVER
ARCHITECT/ENS 65 ALVI
ARCS AWARD REGION II - EBASCO
06/29/66 66M60091 C
06/29/96 WA67J637 C214
X
06/22/66 66W80092 C
06/21/96 N60379701 C214
X
06/29/66 66W60093 C
05/31/96 W603335D1 C214
X
07/11/66 66M60096 C
07/10/92 W605706A2 R704
C
06/17/66 66W60099 C
06/16/99 W666050F4 F099
A
06/09/66 66W60103 C
03/17/92 H605707A2 R550
E
06/06/66 66W60104 C
03/31/92 W605705A2 R550
X
06/08/66 66W60106 C
06/07/93 W605704A2 R550
A
07/26/66 66W60108 S
07/16/9/0 N601450E1 F101
ft TRADE SECRET PROC. 0
09/07/68 66W80110 C
09/07/96 W60529701 C214
X
LARGE BUS CPAF KALWEI 09/13/66
ARCHITECT/EN6 65 HANLEY 09/30/96
START UP FUNDING/ARCS CONTRACT ZONE VI
66W60112 C
M60529602 C214
X
72E
72E
72E
356
72D
65T
65T
65T
75E
72E
72E
M/SVM
64.S14.121
06/21/96
65.342.544
OS/31/96
227.331.064
•7/16/92
2,755.990
17.27S.113
7792
623.669
03/31/92
2,247.646
06/07/93
373.569
09/07/98"
223,346,506
•9/30/96
151,673,624
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
11
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIUM AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
C-PC SPANS 65«A5:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
NUS CORPORTATION
910 CLOPPER RD
GAITHERSBURG MO 20878
MCBRIDE, LOCK I ASSOCIATES
1221 BALTIMORE AVE.SUITE406
KANSAS CITY MO 64105
ARTHUR D LITTLE INC
20 ACORN PARK
CAMBRIDGE MA 02140
JACOBS ENG CO
521 S LAKE AVE
PASADENA CA 91109
ICF INC
ICF TECHNOLOGY INC
399 THORNALL STREET
EDISON NJ 08837
DYNATREND, INC.
21 CABOT ROAD
MOBURN MA 01801
DYNATREND, INC.
21 CABOT ROAD
MOBURN MA 01801
BRANDON, SMITH AND JONES
100 N. MAIN BLDG. 01200
MEMPHIIS TN 38103
CAMP DRESSER 1 MCKEE, INC
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP
13135 LEE JACK MEM HMY 1200
FAIRFAX VA 22033
ALLIANCE TECHNOLOGIES CORP
213 BURLINGTON RD
BEDFORD MA 01730
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPAF ZENI
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KELLEY
START UP FUNDING FOR PROGRAM MGMT. FOR
SMALL BUS TM LEWIS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MURRAY
AUDIT SERVICES - D
LARGE BUS CPAF ZENI
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KELLEY
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C-CLASS
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR PROO/SRVC
SB AREA
09/16/66 66H60117 C
09/15/96 M805357D1 C214
REGION/WITH NUS X
09/06/66 66M60116 C
04/15/92 H605710A2 R704
C
09/26/66 66M60120 C
09/26/96 N60535801 C214
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES AT UNCONTROLLED HAZ. SITE X
LARGE BUS CPAF DURDEN
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KAREN FLOURNEY
START UP FUNDING/ARCS CONTRACT IN ZONE
LARGE BUS CPAF HEAVER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 ALVI
FUNDING ARCS REGION II - ICF
SMALL BUS CPFF N. JONES
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 DAN DELLAPENTA
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
SMALL BUS LH N. JONES
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MCLARNEY
AUDIT SERVICES
SMALL BUS TM STEMART
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 PAIGE
AUDIT SERVICES
LARGE BUS CPAF TOY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JACK JOJOKIAN
TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT, ZONE I
LARGE BUS CPAF TOY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JACK JOJOKIAN
TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT ZONE I
09/30/66 66M60122 C
09/30/96 H609756D2 C214
VI, VII. * VIII X
09/30/88 68M60124 C
09/30/96 H80S637D1 C214
X
10/01/68 66H60123 C
09/30/92 M801100A2 R426
A
10/01/68 66H60126 C
09/30/93 H601063A2 R699
A
09/30/66 66M60133 C
09/29/92 M605711A2 R704
C
12/02/86 66M90002 C
12/01/93 H804234E1 F999
X
12/02/86 66H90003 C
12/01/93 H900279E1 F999
X
REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBL6S
FUNDING PROGRAM MAX.EXP
AREAS tlAX.POTVAl
72E ««MBM
•9/19/96
146,369.396
358 (••••Ml
•9/09/93
2,214,000
72E 'i^tfvW
•9/28/96
69,117.666
72E <••••••
•9/3«/96
190.241.713
b
09/30/98
62.900,366
31E •••••••
03/31/92
3.200.000
51E •••••••
09/30/93
,11,500,000
358 •VMfettBBi
•9/29/93
. 2. 190. 20*
61A 01P 02K«MBMBI|i
12/01/93
«. 123. 772,292
01P 02K 61A •••••i
12/01/93
136,372,940
CIS i
BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
02/27/V-
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
20
C-PC SPANS 65»65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE
EFFORT
PROJECT
COST
PC
TITLE
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
C -CLASS
PROO/SRVC
SBARCA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDIN8 PROGRAM
AREAS
CUtl.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
. MAX.POTVAL
CAMP DRESSER t HCKEE. INC
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP
13135 LEE JACK MEM HHY 1200
FAIRFAX VA 22033
DYNAMAC CORP
ENVIRO-CONTROL DIV
11140 ROCKVILLE PIKE
ROCKVILLE MD 20852
PRC ENVIRON MGMT. INC.
303 E. HACKER DR. SUITE 500
CHICAGO IL 60601
METCALF « EDDY. INC
6480 BUSCH BLVD. SUITE
COLUMBUS OH 43229
200
SCI APPLICATIONS
10260 CAMPUS POINT DRIVE
SAN DIEGO CA 92121
PRC ENVIRON MANAGE INC.
120 HOWARD ST., SUITE 700
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105
FISHER, SAMUEL M
GSB BLDG SUITE 002
PHILADELPHIA PA 19131
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
A400 MESTPARK DR.
MCLEAN VA 22102
FLUOR DANIEL
12790 MERIT DRIVE
SUITE 200
DALLAS TX 75257
ROY F NESTON INC
1426 NESTON MAY
WEST CHESTER PA 19380
LARGE BUS CPAF ROBBINS
SERVICES 65 JEAN MRIGHT
PROCUREMENT REQUEST FOR TES 7
LARGE BUS CPAF ROBBINS
SERVICES 69 JEAN MRIGHT
PROCUREMENT REQUEST FOR THE TES 6
LARGE BUS CPAF CAFFREY
SERVICES 65 PERRY, B
INCREMENTAL FUNDING
LARGE BUS CPAF CAFFREY
SERVICES 65 PERRY, B
INCREMENTAL FUNDING
LARGE BUS CPAF KELLY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 NANCY, DECK
TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT ZONE
LARGE BUS CPAF KELLY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 NANCY DECK
TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT ZONE
IV
IV
SMALL BUS FP
SERVICES 65
AUDIT SERVICES-A
JONES
MISNIEMSKI
68M90004 C
12/01/94 M900280E1 F999
X
12/02/88 68M90005 C
12/01/94 M900201E1 F999
X
03/31/89 66N90006 C
03/31/94 M901S70E1 F999
03/31/89 60M90007 C
03/31/94 M901f71El F999
X
12/02/88 68M90008 C
12/02/93 M600002E1 R*21
X
12/02/88 68M90009 C
12/02/93 M900282E1 R421
X
03/17/69 68M90010 C
10/30/92 MB05713A2 R704
E
LARGE BUS CPFF KELLY 12/05/80 68M90011 C
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 GAIL HANSEN 09/30/92 NA07K094 F999
TO FUND CONTRACT AFTER AMARD RFP NO.MA87-K894 X
LARGE BUS CPAF KALMEI
ARCNITECT/EN6 65 SIEMENSKI
AMARO OF ARCS CONTRACT
01/06/09 60M90013 C
01/05/99 M905005F7 F100
X
LARGE BUS CPAF KALMEI 02/10/09
ARCHITECT/EN6 65 PAUL SUMENSKI 01/31/99
FUNDING PROGRAM M6HT. FOR (ARCS) CONTRACT AMARO
60M90015 C
M90061802 C214
X
01A
01A
05F
05F
0IA
10Q
01A
IN
356
31C
06L
06 L
09K 00L4
09K 00LI
It/01/94
106.022.tt4
It/01/94
110.3M.19f
03/31/94
29,007,229
03/31/94
30.t74.3M
12/02/93
29.314.170
12/02/93
30.t6t.0t0
03/16/93
2.496.720
09/30/92
6,217.101
01/01/9*
143,397.749
01/31/99
156.tl3.437
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
II
02/27/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
C-PC SPANS 65»65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
ROY F
1426
HEST
MESTON INC
HESTON MAY
CHESTER PA
19380
TYPE
EFFORT
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS
ARCHITECT/ENS
COST
PC
CPAF
65
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
ZENI
BARHAKEAN
PROG. MGMT. START UP FOR HESTON/RE6ION
EFF-DATE
EXP-OATE
02/21/69
09/21/99
I
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68M90016
M90064001
C-CLASS
PROO/SRVC
SBAREA
C
C214
X
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
01P
CUM.OBLC9
HAX.EXP
HAX.POTVAL
OZ/tl/99
65.646.569
ECOLOGY ( ENVIRONMENT INC
195 SUGG RO
BUFFALO NY 14225
CAMP DRESSER ft HCKEE. INC
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP
13135 LEE JACK MEM HMY 1200
FAIRFAX VA 22033
ROY F HESTON INC
1426 HESTON HAY
HEST CHESTER PA 19380
CAMP DRESSER ft MCKEE, INC
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP
1)135 LEE JACK MEM HHY 1200
FAIRFAX VA 22033
MORRISON KNUDSEN-FERGUSON CO
1120 LINCOLN ST
DENVER CO 60205
ENVIRONMENTAL TECH INC
P 0 BOX 1236
3705 SAUNDERS AVE
RICHMOND VA 23277
GUARDIAN CONSTRUCTION CO.
1260 PORTER RD.
BEAR DE 19701
DOBBSt RAMT CO
615 PEACHTREE ST., NE
ATLANTA GA 30308
ARLINGTON VA 22209
RESOURCE APPLICATIONS INC.
226 MAPLE AVE. HEST fl401
VIENNA VA 22160
LARGE BUS CPAF MORRISON
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 JOANNE LABAM
PM FUNDING EftE ZONE OF 9 A 10
LARGE BUS CPAF KALMEI
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 FLOURNOY
ARCS AHARO - ZONE 6, 7, 8 - COM
LARGE BUS CPAF BACHMANN
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 HACKER
INCREMENTAL FUNDING
LARGE BUS CPAF HEAVER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 ALVI
ARCS AHARO REGION II - COM
03/10/89 66M90020 C
06/30/99 M90113801 C214
A
03/23/69 66M90021 C
03/31/99 H90133001 C214
X
04/24/90 66M90022 C
03/09/99 M982010F2 C129
X
03/15/89 66H90024 C
03/14/99 H901480D1 C214
X
LARGE BUS CPAF ERNST 03/31/89
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 JANES HANLEY REG III 03/31/99
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SUPPORT CH2M HILL
66M90025 C
H90156001 C214
X
SMALL BUS CR IDES
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JARVELA
REGION 3 MINI ERCS ROUND 2
SMALL BUS CPAF GAMIN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JARVELA
REGION III MINI ERCS ROUND II
SMALL BUS
SERVICES
OSH SUPPORT
CPFF
65
CAFFREY
KENT ANDERSON
SMALL BUS CPFF CAFFREY
SERVICES 65 CAROL HALLACE
PRP OVERSIGHT ft SEARCHES
04/05/69 68M90026 C
04/04/92 MA66H051 F112
A
04/05/89 66H90027 C
04/04/92 M901848C1 F112
C
06/01/69 68M90028 9
04/30/93 M900047E1 F999
D
03/29/69 68M90029 C
03/31/92 M805966E1 F999
D
07M
02K
02K
08L
3A9
06/30/99
71.C9t.M9
•S/31/99
154,794,394
• 46.153,898
SIM Tin 31C
04D
53/14/99
229.362.160
03/31/99
155.373.447
04/04/92
ll.53S.330
04/04/92
9.875.559
04/30/93
1,532.076
•3/31/92
200.000
Cli
A BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
I I
02/2 7/V2
ENVIROttlENTAL PROTECTION A6ENCV
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
ICF INC
9300 LEE HNY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
CH2M HILL
6425 CHRISTIE AVENUE
EMERYVILLE CA 94606
SVERDRUP CORP
601 NORTH 11 TH STREET
ST. LOUIS HO 63101
TRC COMPANIES, INC
213 BURLINGTON RD
BEDFORD MA 01730
EBASCO SERVICES INC.
211 CONGRESS STREET
BOSTON HA 02110
METCALF ( EDDY INC.
PO BOX 4043
HOBURN HA 01868
BOOZ-ALLEN t HAMILTON INC
BOOZ-ALLEN APPLIED RSRCH
4330 EAST WEST HIGHWAY
BETHESOA HO 20014
AMER M6T SYSTEMS
1777 N. KENT ST
ARLINGTON VA 22209
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPFF CAFFREY
SERVICES 65 CARLOS LAGO
SUPPORT OF HA 4 t 5
LARGE BUS CPAF SIMMONS
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 PETER RUBINSTEIN
PROGRAM HGHT. SUPPORT CH2M HILL
LARGE BUS CPAF EAVES
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KAREN FLOURNOY
ARCS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM NCMT. FUNDING
LARGE BUS CPAF KELLEY
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KELLEY
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES
LARGE BUS CPAF KELLEY
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 BARHAKIAN
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES
LARGE BUS CPAF KELLEY
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 BARHAKIAN
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES
EFF-OATE
EXP-DATE
05/01/89
09/30/92
03/24/89
03/31/99
03/24/89
OVS1/99
03/24/89
03/23/99
03/24/69
09/22/99
04/01/89
03/31/99
LARGE BUS LH SHITZER 04/07/69
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 BAILEY 09/08/92
GENERAL HGHT. ASSISTANCE A ADVISORY SERVICES
LARGE BUS LH SCHLOSSER
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 MILLER
PLANNING PR - MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
05/09/69
06/16/92
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
66M90030
N803230E1
66M90031
H90152201
68H90032
N90152301
66M90033
M90 151001
66M90034
H901511D1
66H90036
H90 167001
68M90037
M604763A2
66M90038
N805266A2
C-CLASS
PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
C
F999
X
C
C214
X
C
C214
X
C
C214
X
C
C214
X
C
C214
X
C
R599
X
C
RK99
X
REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBLGS
FUNDING PROGRAM MAX.EXP
AREAS HAX.POTVAL
31P *•••••
S.SM.»4S
•"IRK?
267.79S.S72
OTM •fcHWI
03/31/99
67.SOS.2SO
01P •••••••
01/21/99
61.111.026
09/22/99
63.646.122
OIP €•••••
03/31/99
138.407.988
1*A ••••••
. 07/08/92
14. 726.960
S1H OjUPJBJBflBi
. » 08/18/92
10,615,940
AMER HGT SYSTEMS
1777 N. KENT ST
ARLINGTON VA 22209
A T KEARNEY INC
P 0 BOX 1405
ALEXANDRIA VA 22313
PRC ENVIRON HSMT. INC.
303 E. HACKER DR. SUITE 500
CHICAGO IL 60601
LARGE BUS LH SHITZER
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 ADR1ANA FORTUNE
PLANNING PR/MANAGEMENT SUPPORT CONTRACT
LARGE BUS CPAF LUEDERS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ALLEN PEARCE
PLANNING PR FY88 (REGION I-V)
LARGE BUS CPAF LUEDERS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ALLEN PEARCE
PLANNING PR FY88 (REGION VI-X)
05/19/69
08/18/92
68M90039 C
M605289A2 R599
X
03/31/69 66N90040
OV31/93 N600256E1
C
R421
X
•AH
03U 04T SIP I
OM 02K OS/31/93
13.216.187
03/31/89 66M90041 C
OV31/93 H800257E1 R421
06L
03/31/99
10,446.769
CIS DATA BASE A3 OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
11
02/27/92
CNBR
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST C-PC SPANS 65«65:
PA6E
31
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBL83
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR PROO/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM HAX.CXP
S8AREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
TICHENOR, RESLER t EICHE
•PROF. TONERS, 0310
4010 DUPORT CIRCLE
LOUISVILLE KY 40207
CONRAD1A3SOCIATES
FOURTEEN CORPORATE PLAZA OR
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660
CAMP DRESSER I MCKEE, INC
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP
13135 LEE JACK MEM HHY 0200
FAIRFAX VA 22033
ROY F HESTON INC
1426 HESTON HAY
WEST CHESTER PA 19380
EBASCO SERVICES INC
145 TECHNOLOGY PARK
NORCROSS GA 30092
CH2M HILL
HARRIS TONER
229 PEACHTREE ST NE S 300
ATLANTA GA 30303
MALCOLM PIRINIE INC
2 CORPORATE PARK DR.
HHITE PLAINS NY 10602
LABAT-ANDERSON
1111 L9TN ST. NORTH
ARLINGTON VA 22209
URS CONSULTANTS INC
5251 DTC PKNY. SUITE800
ENGLEHOOO CO 80111
URS COMPANY
155 BOVET RD
SAN MATED CA 94402
SMALL BUS TM LUTZ
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 COIA
CPA AUDIT SERVICES
SHALL BUS TM LUTZ
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 AOACHI
AUDIT SERVICES
LARGE BUS CPAF HALTER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 BARMAKIAN
PROGRAM MGMT. HITHIN COM IN REGION I
LARGE BUS CPAF SPEARS CARTER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 JO ANNE LEBAH
PROGRAM MGMT. SUPPORT, RAY F NESTON INC
05/26/89 68M90043 C
05/25/94 H902126A2 R704
A
05/26/89 68H90044 C
09/30/92 H801082A2 R704
A
04/15/89 68H90045 C
04/17/99 H901877D1 C214
X
04/26/89
04/30/99
LARGE BUS CPAF
ARCHITECT/ENG 65
STEHART
THOMPSON
05/16/89
05/25/99
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION IV
LARGE BUS CPAF
ARCHITECT/ENG 65
STEHART
THOMPSON
05/25/69
05/24/99
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION IV
68H90046 C
M90193901 C214
X
66H90048 C
H902238D1 C214
X
66H90049 C
H902239D1 C214
X
68M900S1 C
H902197D1 C214
X
LARGE BUS CPAF HEAVER 05/26/89
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 ALVI 05/25/99
ARCS PROGRAM MANAGEMENT INITIAL FUNDING
SMALL BUS TM HITHER 06/01/89 66M90052 3
SERVICES 65 LINDA GARRISON 09/30/92 H900514A2 R60S
AGENCY-HIDE LIBRARY SERVICES AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT SUPPORT D
LARGE BUS CPAF CARTER-SPEARS
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 HANLEY
ARCS IN ZONE OF REGIONS VI. VII, VIII
05/26/89
06/30/99
68H90053 C
H902339D2 C214
X
LARGE BUS CPAF
ARCHITECT/ENG 65
URS CONSULTANTS
CARTER
MARK SAMOLIS
06/09/89 68M90054 C
06/30/99 H90247502 C2I4
X
356
356
01P
109
040
040
•ac
55R
OBL
09K
14,607,000
05/25/94
6.823.400
04/17/99
146.760.115
04/30/99
270.527,172
05/24/99
.150.599.326
OS/31/94
81.986.815
06/30/99
V157.811.577
06/30/99
288.760,199
CIS ' CI3BA3E AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
I I
-------
11
02/27/V*
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
CNBR SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PACE 36
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
PATHOLOGICAL ASSOC., INC.
10075 TYLER PL. HYATT PK II
IJAMSVILLE MD 21754
TYPE COST
EFFORT PC
PROJECT TITLE
SHALL BUS CPFF
TECHNICAL SRVC 65
EXP.ASNT.t CHRONIC
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
SAVA6E/SS
MILLER
TOX.D.M.CHEH/HERL/CI
EFF-OATE
EXP-OATE
12/22/67
03/31/91
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
66033526
CI67R515
C-CLASS
PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
C
AH51
A
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDINB PRO6RAM
AREAS
61H .4
CUH.OBL6S
HAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
mm^*
01/U/9C
1.342.769
EN6 COMPUTER OPTECNOMICS
1034 CAPE ST CLAIRE CENTER
ANNAPOLIS MD £1401
BIONETICS CORP
20 RSRCH OR
HAMPTON VA 23666
BENDIX CORPORATION
•FIELD ENGINEERING CORP
1 BENDIX RD
COLUMBIA MD 21045
SMALL BUS CPFF 3AVA6E
EQUIPMENT 69 CLARK
CONST.PROTYPE.LDGIS.SUP.HNL/ENSL/CI
LARGE BUS CPAF SAVA6E/LH
SERVICES 65 HOMARO
AER.IHI8. INTERP.SUP.SER.EPIC/EMS L/LV
LARGE BUS CPFF RIVERSO
SERVICES 65 PERNICE
FACILITY OPERATION EDISON
09/22/67 66033530 S 60A
06/22/94 CI671035 F203
A
09/30/67 66033532 C 60J 69N
69/30/92 CI67R266 M161
X
10/01/67 66042039 C 02K
09/30/92 DU672013 H119
X
06/22/9*
2.042.526
09/16/92
31.261.976
09/36/92
2.994.921
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 02/27/92
EK/1
-------
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
JjUPCTTFUND CONTRACTS
ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
APRIL 1992
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTS MANAGEMENT DIVISION
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460
-------
II
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
A T KEARNEY INC
P 0 BOX 1405
ALEXANDRIA VA 22313
ABT ASSOC INC
55 WHEELER ST
CAMBRIDGE MA 02138
ACUREX CORP
*ENERGY t ENVIRONMENTAL DIV
485 CLYDE AVE
MOUNTAIN VIEH CA 94039
ALLIANCE TECHNOLOGIES CORP
213 BURLINGTON RD
BEDFORD MA 01730
AMER ANALYTICAL & TECHNICAL
SERVICES, INC.
PO BOX 368
CUSHING OK 74023
AMER BUSINESS COMMUNIC. INC.
5100 E. 119TH STREET
GRANDVIEW MO 64030
AMER MGT SYSTEMS
1777 N. KENT ST
ARLINGTON VA 22209
AMER MGT SYSTEMS
1777 N. KENT ST
ARLINGTON VA 22209
AMER MGT SYSTEMS
1777 N. KENT ST
ARLINGTON VA 22209
AMER MGT SYSTEMS
1777 N. KENT ST
ARLINGTON VA 22209
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPAF LUEDERS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ALLEN PEARCE
PLANNING PR FY88 (REGION I-V)
LARGE BUS CPFF TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 HATKINS
ECON. /REG. ANAL. /EVAL. SUP.
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
03/31/89
03/31/93
10/01/90
09/30/94
LARGE BUS CPAF WISE 09/30/89
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 THURNAU 09/30/92
OPNS t RSCH AT USEPA COMBUSTION RSCH FACILITY
LARGE BUS CPAF TOY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JACK JOJOKIAN
TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT ZONE I
12/02/88
12/01/93
SMALL BUS FP BERND 03/26/91
SERVICES 65 HURD ->/W'<-HAEt- 09/26/93
(D000462R1) CHEM. ANAL. SERVICES-INORGANICS
SMALL BUS FP ROGERS
DATA PROCESSING 65 BROOKS
VOICE MAIL
LARGE BUS FP IRICK
DATA PROCESSING 65 LUM
INTEGRATED FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
LARGE BUS LH SCHLOSSER
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 MILLER
PLANNING PR - MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
LARGE BUS LH SWITZER
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 ADRIANA FORTUNE
PLANNING PR/MANAGEMENT SUPPORT CONTRACT
LARGE BUS CPAF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 RATHBUN
GEN. PROG.SUP/OMEP/HA
06/19/90
09/30/95
09/18/87
09/30/92
( IFMS )
05/09/89
08/18/92
05/19/89
08/18/92
07/31/89
09/30/93
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68H90040
W800256E1
68C00080
C00937WB1
68C90038
C90393RB1
68W90003
W900279E1
68D10024
D100703R1
68W00026
W000477A3
68017457
WA87D100
68W90038
W805268A2
68W90039
M805289A2
68C90029
C8W0562B1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM •
SBAREA AREAS
C 03U 04T 31P
R421 05Q 02K
X
C 28A
C214
X
C 62C 62A
M181
X
C 01P 02K 81A
F999
X
AS 72 F
F999
X
S 54D
7379
D
C 42R
7030
X
C 51M
R599
X
C SAM
R599
X
C 87A
R421
A
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
16,044,716
03/31/93
13,216,187
1,057,183
09/30/94
3,451,931
4,045,450
09/30/94
17,757,010
17,574,201
12/01/93
136,372,540
347,945
09/26/93
1,001,780
1,754,706
09/30/95
4,300,000
2,950,594
09/30/92
5,400,000
1,979,230
08/18/92
10,615,940
5,700,120
08/18/92
12,000,000
5,864,878
09/30/93
17,555,264
-J \T€-
(_'•£ K.K
WASHINGTON DC 20041
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C-CLASS
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
AMER. SCIENTIFIC INTL. INC
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
AMER. SCIENTIFIC INTL. INC
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
AMER. SCIENTIFIC INTL. INC
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
AMER. SCIENTIFIC INTL. INC
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
AMER. SCIENTIFIC INTL. INC
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
AMERICAN COASTAL INDUSTRIES
4915 PROSPECTUS DRIVE
SUITE C
DURHAM NC 27713 •
AQUA TERRE COMPANY
2672 BAYSHORE PKHY
MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94043
ARTHUR D LITTLE INC
20 ACORN PARK
CAMBRIDGE MA 02140
ARTHUR D LITTLE INC
20 ACORN PARK
CAMBRIDGE MA 02140
ARTHUR D LITTLE INC
20 ACORN PARK
CAMBRIDGE MA 02140
ASCI CORP.
1365 BEVERLY RD
MCLEAN VA 22101
SMALL BUS CPFF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 NEESMITH
ON-SITE FATE & TRANSPORT SERV.
SMALL BUS CPFF OPPERMAN
SERVICES 65 GRANT
NEWPORT ON-SITE TECH.SUP.
10/01/90 66C00054 S
09/30/93 C00939RB1 R421
D
09/24/90 68C00051 S
09/30/93 C01210RB1 AH91
D
SMALL BUS CPFF RICHARDS 09/08/89 68D90094 S
SERVICES 65 DELLARCO 09/30/93 D900445M1 AH21
TECH.SUPP.FOR ENV.4 HUMAN EXP.MONIT.* MOD.RES.PROG. D
SMALL BUS CPFF HADE
SERVICES 65 GRINDER
LOCAL AREA NETWORK ADMIN t PC TECH. SUPP.
SMALL BUS CPFF ADAMS
SERVICES 65 BURKHART
ORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALY.SUP./DUL
SMALL BUS FP ROGERS
DATA PROCESSING 65 HORTON
INTERIM WORKSTATIONS
08/10/89
09/30/93
68D90075 S
D900210M1 R408
D
10/01/90 68C90050 C
09/30/92 C90416RB1 8999
A
09/04/91 68W00021 S
09/30/92 W901404A3 7010
D
SMALL BUS CPFF OPPERMAN
SERVICES 65 GOLD
EXPOSURE/RISK ASSESS./ERL/ATHENS
LARGE BUS CPFF ENINGER/DR
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ROYER
PEER REVIEW & GRAPHICS AIDS SUP/ADA
LARGE BUS CPFF SAVAGE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 UWE FRANK
PERS PROT TECH RES
06/22/90 68C00019 C
09/30/93 C90918RB1 R504
C
09/30/89 68C80037 C
09/30/93 C8R0276B1 R421
X
09/30/89 68C90037 C
09/30/93 C90906RB1 R421
X
LARGE BUS CPAF ZENI 09/28/88 68W80120 C
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KELLEY 09/28/98 W805358D1 C214
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES AT UNCONTROLLED HAZ. SITE X
SMALL BUS CPFF OPPERMAN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ZABINSKI
POLICY/TECHNICAL SUPPORT FOR NESO
09/25/90 68C00055 S
09/30/93 C01355AB1 R498
D
05H
06M 63P 23D
60U
63W
63N 60B 05H
28B
32P
63K
63L
62C
72E
60J
1,064,173
09/30/93
3,291,044
1,314,301
09/30/93
3,137,905
2,064,431
09/30/93
3,879,980
349,776
09/30/93
1,089,266
1,890,756
09/30/92
4,562,954
36,834,490
02/28/92
67,547,300
1,763,245
09/30/93
5,074,464
285,048
09/30/93
420,319
228,000
09/30/93
4,208,319
9,302,941
09/28/98
69,117,666
690,223
09/30/93
1,400,695
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
ASCI INC
1365 BEVERLY RD
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
ASCI INC
1365 BEVERLY RD
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
ASCI INC
1365 BEVERLY RD
PO BOX 396
MCLEAN VA 22101
ASK ASSOCIATES
901 KENTUCKY
SUITE 106
LAURENCE KS 66044
BATTELLE MEM INST
COLUMBUS LABS
505 KING AVE
COLUMBUS OH 43201
BATTELLE MEM INST
COLUMBUS LABS
505 KING AVE
COLUMBUS OH 43201
BATTELLE MEM INST
COLUMBUS LABS
505 KING AVE
COLUMBUS OH 43201
BAYAUD INDUSTRIES
95 SOUTH CHEROKEE
DENVER CO 80223
BECHTEL CORP
50 BEALE ST
P 0 BOX 3965
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS CPFF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 NEE SMITH
TECH SUPPORT - ATHENS LAB
SMALL BUS CPFF TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BATTERMAN
AQUATIC TOLIC TST.
SMALL BUS CPFF TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MATTHEWS .. ft^O) «.'fc
TECH. SUP. SERV/ADA '
SMALL BUS CPFF SALIBY
SERVICES 65 BAILEY
REAS DATA ENTRY SUPPORT FOR REGION VII
03/21/91
09/30/92
09/30/90
09/30/92
10/01/90
08/31/93
08/24/89
08/24/92
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF DAVIS 02/05/90
RESEARCH & DEV 65 PLEIL 09/30/93
EXP. ASSESS METHODS RES. & DEV. FOR ENV. POLL. , ETC.
NON/PRFT RSCH CPAF REYNOLDS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 RATHBUN
TECH.SUP/OMEP/HAV55) WISE
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF KEMPF
SERVICES 65 STERRETT
STAT. ANAL. SUPP. FOR ASSESS. OF TOXIC SUBS.
SMALL BUS FP WEANT
SERVICES 65 JORDAN
ADMIN SUPPORT SERVICES - REGION 8
LARGE BUS CPAF MORRISON
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 MARK SAMOLIS
PROGRAM MGMT. SUPPORT BECHTEL
01/24/89
09/30/92
09/29/90
09/30/92
10/15/90
09/30/92
06/21/89
06/30/99
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68C10012
C01350RB1
68C00057
C00941RB1
68C80058
C8R0355B1
68D90132
D901092N1
68D00007
D900838M1
68C80105
C8M0563B1
68D00126
D000468L1
68D00074
D001009N1
68H90060
M902294D1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBLGS
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM MAX. EXP
SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
S
AH91
D
S
R504
D
S
H299
D
LS
F099
C
C
AH21
X
C
R421
X
C
F401
X
S
R699
A
C
C214
X
31C - 430,951
09/30/92
2,734,218
28E 63N 36H 1,526,534
63N 642 63N 09/30/93
3,083,086
63L 75K 63L 6,223,535
75K 09/30/93
5,899,435
07W 177,001
08/24/92
278,669
60E 1,949,092
09/30/92
4,948,649
87A 13,760,031
09/30/92
13,243,131
69E 1,456,000
09/30/92
4,276,466
08B 08T 08L 807,505
09/30/91
353,077
09K 8,916,845
06/30/99
279,757,767
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94119
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPAMS 65*65:
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
BECHTEL CORP BECHTEL ENVIRON
800 JACKSON PLAZA TOWER
OAKRIDGE TURNPIKE
OAK RIDGE TN 37830
BELMONTE PARK LABORATORY
1415 SALEM AVENUE
DAYTON OH 45406
BENDIX CORPORATION
*FIELD ENGINEERING CORP
1 BENDIX RD
COLUMBIA MD 21045
BIONETICS CORP
20 RSRCH DR
HAMPTON VA 23666
BIONETICS CORP
2 EATON STREET, 10TH FL.
HARBOUR CENTRE BLDG.S-1000
HAMPTON VA 23669
BLACK & VEATCH CONSULT ENG
1500 MEADOW LAKE PKWY
KANSAS CITY MO 64114
BLACK & VEATCH CONSULT ENG
1500 MEADOW LAKE PKWY
KANSAS CITY MO 64114
BLACK & VEATCH INC
SUITE W 500
1117 PERIMETER CENTER
ATLANTA GA 30338
BOOZ-ALLEN i HAMILTON INC
BOOZ-ALLEN APPLIED RSRCH
4330 EAST WEST HIGHWAY
BETHESDA MD 20014
BOOZ-ALLEN & HAMILTON INC
BOOZ-ALLEN APPLIED RSRCH
4330 EAST WEST HIGHWAY
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPAF STEWART
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 THOMPSON , pOO (r
EFF-DATE CONTRACT
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR
06/22/89 68W90058
06/30/99 W902424D1
FUNDING FOR REGIONAL PROGRAM HGMT-BECHTEL.4
SMALL BUS FP TURNBOUGH
SERVICES 65 GOLD
QUAL. ORGANIC ANALY.SVCS.
LARGE BUS CPFF RIVERSO
SERVICES 65 PERNICE \)£M£j\ n
FACILITY OPERATION EDISON
LARGE BUS CPAF SAVAGE/LH
SERVICES 65 HOWARD
AER.IMIG.INTERP. SUP. SER. EPIC/EMS L/LV
LARGE BUS CPAF ANDERSON
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 RAY WESSELMAN
09/24/90 68C00046
09/30/93 C00921RB1
10/01/87 68042039
09/30/92 DU872013
09/30/87 68033532
09/30/92 CI87R266
10/01/89 68C90032
09/30/92 C90497RB1
TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR EMSL QUALITY CONTROL
LARGE BUS CPAF MANZKE
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 SUSAN HESTON
FUNDING/COMMUNITY RELATIONS SPRINGFIELD
LARGE BUS CPAF OZER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 PIKE
ARCS REGION III
LARGE BUS CPAF STEWART
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 THOMPSON
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION
LARGE BUS CPAF GALLION/HOUSEMA
SERVICES 65 THEA MCMANUS
RCRA/SF HOTLINE
LARGE BUS CR BOYD
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 LOGAN ^ C-OJiVfftV^
ANALYTICAL SUPPORT J
04/08/88 68W80064
04/28/98 W801781D1
TOWNSHIP DUMP
06/29/88 68W80091
06/29/98 WA87J837
06/02/89 68W90055
06/30/99 W902423D1
IV
09/14/90 68W00039
09/30/93 W900500E1
03/01/91 68W10005
07/31/92 W100785D2
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
C 04D
C214
X
S 60A
AZ11
D
C 02K
M119
X
C 60J 89W
M181
X
C 40P
AH91
X
C 72E
F999
X
C 72E
C214
X
C 04D
C214
X
C 72D 31M
P498
X
C 72C
F199
X
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
6,184,949
06/30/99
148,362,612
157,228
09/30/93
225,000
1,359,177
09/30/92
2,994,921
13,281,088
09/30/92
31,281,970
2,303,797
09/30/93
9,701,337
11,311,891
04/28/98
220,160,212
19,450,679
06/29/98
64,516,121
8,115,313
06/30/99
141,623,193
3,967,023
09/30/93
17,393,025
9,295,952
07/13/95
9,295,952
/We
BETHESDA MD 20014
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
BOOZ-ALLEN & HAMILTON INC
BOOZ-ALLEN APPLIED RSRCH
4330 EAST WEST HIGHWAY
BETHESDA MD 20014
BRANDON, SMITH AND JONES
100 N. MAIN BLDG. 81200
MEMPHIIS TN 38103
BROOKVALE (COMPUTER) ASSOC.
265 ODRT AVE.
HAUPPAUSE NY 11788
BUSINESS MGMT
RSRCH ASSOC INC
CRYSTAL GTHY 3, SUITE 1209
ARLINGTON VA 22202
CAMP DRESSER t MCKEE, INC
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP
13135 LEE JACK MEM HWY 8200
FAIRFAX VA 22033
CAMP DRESSER 4 MCKEE, INC
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP
13135 LEE JACK MEM HWY 8200
FAIRFAX VA 22033
CAMP DRESSER t MCKEE, INC
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP
13135 LEE JACK MEM HWY 8200
FAIRFAX VA 22033
CAMP DRESSER 4 MCKEE, INC
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP
13135 LEE JACK MEM HWY 8200
FAIRFAX VA 22033
CAMP DRESSER i MCKEE, INC
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP
13135 LEE JACK MEM HWY 8200
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS LH SWITZER
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 BAILEY
GENERAL MGMT. ASSISTANCE & ADVISORY SEf
SMALL BUS TM STEWART
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 PAIGE
AUDIT SERVICES
SMALL BUS FP AMES
DATA PROCESSING 65 DAVID M CLINE
ORD MODERNIZATION II
SMALL BUS FP PR E JEAN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 SUZANNE MATSUMOTO
LARGE BUS CPAF TOY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JACK JOJOKIAN
TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT, ZONE I
LARGE BUS CPAF KALWEI
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 FLOURNOY
ARCS AWARD - ZONE 6, 7, 8 - COM
LARGE BUS CPAF ROBBINS
SERVICES 65 JEAN WRIGHT
PROCUREMENT REQUEST FOR TES 7
LARGE BUS CPAF WALTER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 BARMAKIAN , (J^C^
PROGRAM MGMT. WITHIN COM IN REGION I
LARGE BUS CPAF WEAVER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 ALVI
ARCS AWARD REGION II - COM
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
04/07/89
09/08/92
JVICES
09/30/88
09/29/92
09/23/91
09/30/96
02/04/92
09/30/92
12/02/88
12/01/93
03/23/89
03/31/99
12/01/94
04/15/89
04/17/99
03/15/89
03/14/99
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68W90037
W804763A2
68W80133
W805711A2
68W10045
Wl 02856 A3
68H20007
W102856A3
68W90002
W804234E1
68W90021
W901330D1
68W90004
W900280E1
68W90045
W901877D1
68W90024
W901480D1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
C 16A
R599
X
C 356
R704
C
C 55M
7010
A
C
U001
C
C 81A 01P 02K
F999
X
C 07W
C214
X
C 81A
F999
X
C 01P
C214
X
C 02K
C214
X
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
9,191,460
07/08/92
14,728,960
651,344
09/29/93
2,150,200
2,000
09/30/96
29,697,233
21,144
09/30/95
475,000
12,867,004
12/01/93
123,772,202
15,251,552
03/31/99
154,794,394
26,641,523
12/01/94
106,822,044
7,596,683
04/17/99
148,780,115
30,604,106
03/14/99
229,362,180
FAIRFAX VA 22033
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE, INC
COM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORP
13135 LEE JACK MEM HWY «200
.FAIRFAX VA 22033
CHARLES RIVER MOUSE FARMS IN
251 BALLARDVALE ST
WILMINGTON MA 01887
CHEM WEST ANALYTICAL LABS
600 W. NORTH MARKET BLVD
SACREMENTO CA 95834
CHEMTECH CONSULTING GRP LTD
360 W 11TH ST
NEW YORK NY 10014
CH2M HILL
6425 CHRISTIE AVENUE
EMERYVILLE CA 94608
CH2M HILL
^SOUTHEAST INC
1941 ROLAND CLARK PLACE
RESTON VA 22091
CH2M HILL
HARRIS TOWER
229 PEACHTREE ST NE S 300
ATLANTA GA 30303
CH2M HILL
CH2M HILL CENTRAL
310 W WISCONSIN AVE
MILWAUKEE WI 53201
CH2M HILL
*SOUTHEAST INC
1941 ROLAND CLARK PLACE
RESTON VA 22091
CH2M HILL CENTRAL, INC.
5995 GREENWOOD PLZ BLVD
ENGLEWOOD CO 80111
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPAF STEWART
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 THOMPSON
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION
LARGE BUS FP HILLIARD
SERVICES 65 LINKO
PROVIDE HERL WITH RESEARCH ANIMALS
LARGE BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 BANKERT Kft*€A>
D000463R1-ORGANICS ANALYSIS *
SMALL BUS FP
BLANK/ILLEGAL 65 ANGELO CARASEA
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
06/09/89
06/09/99
IV
10/01/87
09/30/92
09/28/90
03/27/93
03/23/92
09/22/94
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68W90056
N902426D1
68024549
DUd7B087
68D00168
D001914R1
68D20041
D200755R1
C-CLASS
PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
C
C214
X
S
8820
X
AS
F999
X
A
8734
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
04D
61H
72F
72F
CHEMICAL ANALYTICAL SERVICES FOR INORGANICS
LARGE BUS CPAF SIMMONS
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 PETER RUBINSTEIN
PROGRAM MGMT. SUPPORT CH2M HILL
LARGE BUS CPAF CORREA
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 TRACY LOY
03/24/89
03/31/99
09/13/88
08/31/08
68W90031
W901522D1
68017251
WA86J012
REM 4 REMEDIAL PLANNING AT SEL HAZ WASTE SITES \-j „
LARGE BUS CPAF STEWART
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 THOMPSON
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION
LARGE BUS CPAF BAMFORD
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 BALLOTTI
FOREST WASTE DISPOSAL SITE
LARGE BUS CPAF OZER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 DEL RE1
ARCS AWARD REGION III - CH2M HILL
LARGE BUS CPAF KALHEI
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 HANLEY
START UP FUNDING/ARCS CONTRACT ZONE VI
05/25/89
05/24/99
IV
01/30/88
01/31/98
06/03/88
06/02/98
09/13/88
09/30/98
»"
68W90049
W902239D1
68W80040
W801349D1
68W80090
W803311D1
68W80112
W805296D2
C
C214
X
C
F108
X
C
C214
X
C
F999
X
C
C214
X
C
C214
X
09K
72E
040
72E
72E
72E
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
7,524,500
06/09/99
150,927,991
638,561
09/30/92
715,166
191,131
03/27/93
1,911,310
94,248
09/22/94
942,480
13,430,484
03/31/99
267,795,372
188,328,692
09/30/98
203,513,243
2,257,573
05/24/99
150,599,328
19,100,221
01/31/98
227,222,913
21,341,622
06/03/98
233,285,045
15,654,198
09/30/98
151,873,624
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
CINCINNATI, UNIV OF
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
CINCINNATI OH 45221
CLEMENT ASSOC INC
9300 LEE HWY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
CLEMENT ASSOC INC
9300 LEE HWY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
COMPEX CORPORATION
5520 CHEROKEE AVENUE
ALEXANDRIA VA 22312
COMPUCHEM CORPORATION
3308 EAST CHAPEL HALL
NELSON HIGHWAY
RTP NC 27709
COMPUCHEM LAB INC
3308 EAST CHAPEL HALL
NELSON HIGHWAY
RTP NC 27709
COMPUCHEM LAB INC
3308 EAST CHAPEL HALL
NELSON HIGHWAY
RTP NC 27709
COMPUTER BASED SYSTEM INC
2750 PROSPERITY DR.
FAIRFAX VA 22031
COMPUTER SCI CORP
SYSTEMS DIV
6565 ARLINGTON BLVD
FALLS CHURCH VA 22046
COMPUTER SCI CORP
SYSTEMS DIV
6565 ARLINGTON BLVD
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
PROJECT TITLE
NON/PRFT UNIV CR OPPERMAN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 GROSSE
TECH. SUP. FOR CNTR.HILL/RREL/CI
LARGE BUS CPFF HOUSER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 RILEY
HEALTH t RISK ASSESS. SUPP. FOR TOXIC AIR
11/13/89
09/30/92
09/29/89
09/30/92
POLL.
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
66C90031
C90394RB1
68090158
D800963N1
LARGE BUS CPFF CONNOLLY 09/30/91 68C10078
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 CICMANEC 09/30/92 C100003T1
TECH SUPPORT - ENV HEALTH ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTS/ECAO
SMALL BUS FP COLLINS
DATA PROCESSING 65 SHANNON (*(¥-€
COMPUTER PROGRAMMING AND SERVICES
08/26/87
07/31/92
LARGE BUS FP BERND 07/15/91
SERVICES 65 BARRON S^OV • (-n 01/14/94
CHEM ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
LARGE BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH HP^A**
D000461R1 ?
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT eO
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH , ftO^ft^
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
SMALL BUS CPAF MEANT
SERVICES 65 SELLERS
TRI DOCUMENT PROCESSING CENTER
LARGE BUS TM SCHLOSSER
DATA PROCESSING 65 CLINE
TECHNICAL & OPERATIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES
LARGE BUS CPAF SALIBY
SERVICES 65 SCHUR
NCPD TECH. SUPPORT SERVICES
09/25/90
03/24/93
09/28/90
03/28/93
03/01/88
09/30/92
09/28/90
12/31/92
01/02/91
09/30/92
68017444
HA87D096
68D10083
D101858R1
68D00150
D001854R1
68D00159
D001858R1
68D60013
D800223L1
68M00043
H902404A3
68D10003'
D000171N1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBLGS
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM MAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
C
R425
X
C
F103
X
C
R421
X
S
R302
D
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
X
LS
R307
D
C
R499
X
C
R703
X
62C
53C
643
31A
72F
72F
72F
69M
SIC
42F
5,390,747
09/30/93
11,351,954
405,209
09/30/92
630,903
70,000
09/30/94
4,435,950
2,253,914
07/31/92
9,280,000
2,104,124
01/14/94
7,618,960
162,697
03/24/93
522,720
3,335,793
03/28/93
9,931,630
14,331,978
09/30/92
23,759,083
72,419,054
09/30/95
349,000,000
54M 54E 2,580,074
09/30/94
10,919,677
O 5 «
FALLS CHURCH VA 22046
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST C-PC SPANS
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
CONCEPTUAL SYSTEMS INC 1
100 WAYNE AVE, 12TH FL
SILVER SPRING MD 20910
COHRAD&ASSOCIATES
FOURTEEN CORPORATE PLAZA DR
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660
CONTROL DATA CORP
11428 ROCKVILLE PIKE
ROCKVILLE MD 20852
CWA, INC
4015 IBIS STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92103
DAEDALUS ENTERPRISE INC.
P.O. BOX 1869
ANN ARBOR MI 48106
DANIEL DENNIS & COMPANY
COPLEY PLACE
100 HUNTINGTON AVE
BOSTON MA 02116
DATA GENERAL CORP.
ROUTE 9
SOUTHBORO MA 01772
DATACHEM, INC
520 WAKARA WAY
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84108
DATACHEM, INC
960 H LEZOY DRIVE
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84108
DAVCO
2200-B VANKER RD
SAN JOSE CA 95131
ODD COMPANY
8300 PROFESSIONAL PL. *117
LANDOVER MD 20785
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS TM OSBORNE 08/08/88
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 K. WRIGHT 08/07/93
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
SMALL BUS TM LUTZ 05/26/89
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ADACHI 09/30/92
AUDIT SERVICES
LARGE BUS TM MILLER 10/04/90
DATA PROCESSING 65 HAMMOND 09/30/92
FUNDING FOR THE SHARING SERVICES WITH CDC
SMALL BUS FP KRAUSE 09/30/90
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 MAUREEN DELANEY 09/30/92
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68W80106
W805704A2
68H90044
W801082A2
68W00049
H003008A3
68W00041
W002425A2
NAT'L RECRUITMENT MARKETING STRATEGY » DISPLAY DEVELOPMENT
SMALL BUS FP ODEN 07/16/91
EQUIPMENT 65 LUNETTA 07/15/92
AIRCRAFT MULT. SCANNING RECORDING SYSTEM
SMALL BUS TM RIVERSO 01/03/89
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 WAOTZLOUSKY 12/31/92
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING AUDIT SERVICES
LARGE BUS FP BERND 07/15/91
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER •> R.4%fcU- 01/14/94
CHEM ANAL SVCS FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
LARGE BUS FP PRESNELL 09/25/90
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER (L\H/b*U- 03/24/93
(D000461R1) '
LARGE BUS FP BERHD 08/06/91
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER , RvJS&LU 02/05/94
CHEH ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
SMALL BUS FP HOLLAND 10/01/89
MAINTENANCE/JN 65 BLAZEVICH 09/30/92
PROVIDE SVC. & MAINT.ON BC/MS/DS SYSTEMS
SMALL BUS CPFF BZDUSEK 04/01/89
SERVICES 65 EASTWOOD 09/30/92
FUNDING FOR NEW FORM/PUBLICATIONS/CTR/FMSD/CI
68C10036
C100646T1
68R 90002
DUQ72094
68D10087
D101866R1
68D00149
DQ01825R1
68D10080
D101855R1
68000001
D901754P1
68C90018
C8F0354B1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SB ARE A AREAS
C 85T
R550
A
C 35G
R704
A
S 42F
R305
X
S 85P
R799
D
C 269 60J
K066
A
S 356
R709
D
AS 72 F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72 F
F999
X
A 10P
J066
A
C 31A 75E
T012
C
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
256 , 376
08/07/93
373,565
653,034
05/25/94
8,823,600
377,987
09/30/92
260,000
353,723
09/30/92
353,723
445,872
07/15/92
445,872
356,198
12/31/92
361,589
445,500
01/14/94
2,138,400
226,077
03/24/93
522,720
328,900
02/05/94
0
86,100
09/30/92
132,405
904,116
09/30/92
902,016
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
DIGITAL EQUIP CORP
8100 CORPORATED DRIVE
LANDOVER MD 20785
DIGITAL EQUIP CORP
8100 CORPORATED DRIVE
LANDOVER MD 20785
DOBBS, RAMT CO
615 PEACHTREE ST., NE
ATLANTA GA 30308
ARLINGTON VA 23209
DONALD CLARK ASSOCIATES
4045 S. SPENCER ST. iA-59-B
LAS VEGAS NV 89109
DONOHUE & ASSOCIATES
4738 N 40TH ST
SMEBOYGAN MI 53083
DPRA INC.
P.O. BOX 727
200 RESEARCH DRIVE
MAHATTAN KS 66502
DYNAMAC CORP
ENVIRO-CONTROL DIV
11 140 ROCKVILLE PIKE
ROCKVILLE MD 20852
DYNATREND, INC.
21 CABOT ROAD
WOBURN MA 01801
DYNATREND, INC.
21 CABOT ROAD
HOBURN MA 01801
E C JORDAN COMPANY
PO BOX 7050
PORTLAND ME 04112
TYPE COST
EFFORT PC
PROJECT TITLE
NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
LARGE BUS FP AMES
DATA PROCESSING 65 DAVID M CLINE
ORD MODERNIZATION II
LARGE BUS FP AMES
DATA PROCESSING 65 DAVID M CLINE
ORD MODERNIZATION II
SMALL BUS CPFF
SERVICES 65
OSW SUPPORT
SMALL BUS FP
SERVICES 65
DONALD CLARK ASSOC.
LARGE BUS CPAF
ARCHITECT/ENG 65
ARCS AWARD REGION V
CAFFREY
KENT ANDERSON
SCOTT
MILLER
BAMFORD
HESTON
- DONAHUE
LARGE BUS CPAF GOLDBERG
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 MARLENE LEMRO
HEADQUATERS TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT
LARGE BUS CPAF
SERVICES 65
PROCUREMENT REQUEST
SMALL BUS CPFF
TECHNICAL SRVC 65
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
SMALL BUS LH
TECHNICAL SRVC 65
AUDIT SERVICES
LARGE BUS FP
SERVICES 65
INITIAL FUNDING - E
ROBBINS
JEAN WRIGHT
FOR THE TES 8
N. JONES
DAN DELLAPENTA
N. JONES
MCLARNEY
LAU
FISK^JORV^
C JORDAN
09/23/91
09/30/96
09/23/91
09/30/98
06/01/89
04/30/93
09/20/90
09/30/93
06/29/88
05/31/98
02/22/91
09/30/92
12/02/88
12/01/94
10/01/88
09/30/92
10/01/88
09/30/93
12/09/67
03/28/99
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68M10044
H102855A3
68M10043
H102854A3
68M90028
H900047E1
68C00085
C00949RB1
68H80093
H803335D1
68H10007
H903403E1
68W90005
W900281E1
66H80125
H801100A2
68H60126
H801083A2
68W80032
W300311D1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBLGS
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM MAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS ' MAX.POTVAL
C
7010
X
C
7010
X
S
F999
D
C
S215
C
C
C214
X
C
R409
X
C
F999
X
C
R426
A
C
R699
A
AS
F999
X
55M
61H
31H 75K
60J
72E
81A
81A
51E
51E
72F
674,799
09/30/96
43,874,684
1,014,057
09/30/98
36,357,600
31C 720,410
04/30/93
1,532,076
613,328
09/30/93
613,332
14,466,298
05/31/98
227,331,084
5,916,830
02/21/96
18,258,843
29,919,015
12/01/94
118,380,195
2,421,808
03/31/92
3,200,000
3,303,174
09/30/93
11,500,000
311,180
06/08/90
900,900
r,;
Ck^
A
t
A<
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
VEND SORT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
EASTERN RESEARCH GROUP INC
6 WHITTEMORE ST
ARLINGTON MA 02174
EASTERN RESEARCH GROUP INC
6 WHITTEMORE ST
ARLINGTON MA 02174
EASTERN RESEARCH GROUP INC
6 WHITTEMORE ST
ARLINGTON MA 02174
EASTERN RESEARCH GROUP INC
6 WHITTEMORE ST
ARLINGTON MA 02174
EASTERN RESEARCH GROUP, INC.
185 ALEWIFE PARKWAY
CAMBRIDGE MA 02138
EBASCO SERVICES INC
145 TECHNOLOGY PARK
NORCROSS GA 30092
EBASCO SERVICES INC.
211 CONGRESS STREET
BOSTON MA 02110
EBASCO SERVICES INC.
TWO WORLD TRADE CENTER
NEW YORK NY 10048
ECOLOGY t ENVIRONMENT INC
368 PLEASANT VIEW DRIVE
BUFFALO CORPORATE CENTER
LANCASTER NY 14086
ECOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT INC
195 SUGG RD
BUFFALO NY 14225
ECOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT INC
195 SUGG RD
BUFFALO NY 14225
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPFF ANDERSON
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 CAROL HAYNES
TECHNICAL SUPPORT FOR PEER REVIEW
SMALL BUS CPFF HODGSON
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MANNING
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
07/17/91
09/30/92
09/30/91
09/30/94
CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INFORMATION TECH
SMALL BUS CPFF WEANT
RESEARCH & DEV 65 MILLER
TASK FORCE ON ENV. CANCER & HEART ft LUNG
SMALL BUS CPFF BZDUSEK/CB
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MINTZ
DEV.CRIT.DOC. & HLTH.ADVIS/ODW/HA
SMALL BUS CPAF TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 CAROL GROVE
WTR. POLL. CONTROL SUPPORT SERVICES
LARGE BUS CPAF STEWART
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 THOMPSON
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION
LARGE BUS CPAF KELLEY
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 BARMAKIAN
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES
LARGE BUS CPAF WEAVER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 ALVI
ARCS AWARD REGION II - EBASCO
LARGE BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 CARASEA ptfbC&UD
09/29/89
09/30/94
DISEASE
09/30/88
09/30/92
10/01/90
09/30/92
05/18/89
05/25/99
IV
03/24/89
09/22/99
09/07/88
09/07/98
00/02/91
02/01/94
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68C10030
C100005T1
68C10018
C01356RB1
.SUPPORT
68D90133
D800769M1
68C80033
C8W0268B1
68C00068
C00902RB1
68W90048
W902238D1
68W90034
W901511D1
68W80110
W805297D1
68D10093
D101869R1
CHEM ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANltS(D100455Rl )
LARGE BUS CPAF OZER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 ROY SCHROCK
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES III
SMALL BUS CPAF SHARPE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FREDERICKS
FIT ZONE 2
05/06/88
05/05/98
11/01/86
10/30/92
68H80085
W802439D1
68017347
HA86K259
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
C 646 72A 64G
B599 643
X
C 26R
AH91
A
C 61X
AZ11
C
C 40D
F103
C
C 26S
R533
A
C 04D
C214
X
C 01P
C214
X
C 72E
C214
X
AS 72F
F999
X
C 72E
C214
X
C 72E
F999
A
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
444,922
09/30/95
3,681,710
1,151,248
09/30/94
3,584,130
987,414
09/30/94
2,329,834
2,324,123
09/30/91
3,481,262
2,464,613
09/30/94
14,861,022
26,006,143
05/25/99
145,630,369
20,484,380
09/22/99
63,646,122
37,225,753
09/07/98
223,348,508
466,400
02/01/94
2,238,720
11,820,381
05/06/98
62,608,286
117,605,000
10/30/92
150,138,277
.v> cS -
Res -
f <• i? C
O >— K V- ._
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
11
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYpE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C-CLASS
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
ECOLOGY t ENVIRONMENT INC
195 SUGG RD
BUFFALO NY 14225
ECOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT INC
195 SUGG RD
BUFFALO NY 14225
ECOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT INC
195 SUGG RD
BUFFALO NY 14225
EH PECHAN 4 ASSOC INC.
5537 HEMPSTEAD WAY
SPRINGFIELD VA 22151
EMG COMPUTER OPTECNOMICS
1034 CAPE ST CLAIRE CENTER
ANNAPOLIS MD 21401
ENSECO INC
ROCKY MT LAB
4955 YARROW ST
ARVADA CO 80002
ENSECO, INC
2455 INDUSTRIAL BLVD
SACRAMENTO CA 95691
ENSECO, INC
2200 COTTONTAIL LN
SOMERSET NJ 08873
ENSECO, INC
205 ALEWISE BROOK PKHY
CAMBRIDGE MA 02138
ENSITE, INC.
5119 S ROYAL ATLANTA DR
TUCKER GA 30084
ENVIRON HEALTH RSRCHiTESTING
2514 REGENCY RD
LEXINGTON KY 40503
LARGE BUS CPAF HENE
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 KAREN TOMIMATSU
LARGE BUS CPAF MANZKE
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 SUSAN HESTON
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES V
LARGE BUS CPAF MORRISON
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 JOANNE LABAH
PM FUNDING E»E ZONE OF 9 & 10
10/01/90 68W00037 C
11/30/94 W003769C3 F108
X
05/06/88 68H80086 C
05/05/98 H802438D1 C214
X
03/10/89 68W90020 C
06/30/99 H901138D1 C214
A
SMALL BUS CPFF LLOYD 09/20/91 68D10140 S
RESEARCH & DEV 65 L. JONES 09/30/92 D100535M1 R409
MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATION ANALYSES AND SERVICES C
SMALL BUS CPFF SAVAGE
EQUIPMENT 65 CLARK
CONST.PROTYPE.LOGIS.SUP.MHL/EMSL/CI
LARGE BUS FP PRESNELL
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 BANKERT
D000463R1-ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP SIMMONS
SERVICES 65 CARASEA ^
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 HURD , rl'
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
SMALL BUS FP JAMISON
SERVICES 65 MONELL
ENSITE, INC. REGIONAL ERCS
09/22/87 68033530 S
06/22/94 CI871035 F203
A
09/28/90 68D00151 AS
03/27/93 D001857R1 F999
X
09/28/90 68D00162 AS
03/27/93 D001922R1 F999
X
09/28/90 68D00163 AS
03/27/93 D001864R1 F999
X
09/28/90 68D00161 AS
02/27/94 D001861R1 F999
X
08/17/88 68W80099 C
08/16//95 W886050F4 F099
a\ A
SMALL BUS CPAF HOUSER 09/30/91
SERVICES 65 DR MICHAEL HATERS 09/30/92
ON-SITE/OFF-SITE RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR GTD
68D10148 C
D100085M1 F999
C
72D
72E
10Q
265
60A
72F
72F
72 F
72F
72D
61H
46,576,724
09/30/92
102,105,297
7,950,517
05/06/98
60,855,304
8,299,363
06/30/99
71,291,229
66,500
09/30/94
2,666,931
2,042,520
06/22/94
2,042,520
285,485
03/27/93
1,578,720
157,864
03/27/93
1,578,720
307,193
03/27/93
1,578,720
301,272
02/27/94
1,578,760
7,272,616
08/16/W'i'
17,275,113
2,284,759
09/30/96
26,291,660
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
VEND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
12
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
ENVIRON SYS RSRCH INSTITUTE
380 NEH YORK STREET
REDLANDS CA 92373
ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT SUPPORT
951* MIDWOOD RD
SILVER SPRING MD 20910
ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT SUPPORT
9514 MIDWOOD RD
SILVER SPRING MD 20910
ENVIRONMENTAL TECH INC
P 0 BOX 1236
3705 SAUNDERS AVE
RICHMOND VA 23277
TYPE COST
EFFORT PC
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS FP
DATA PROCESSING 65
CIS SOFTWARE
SMALL BUS CPFF
MANAGEMENT CONS 65
ANALYTICAL SUPPORT
SMALL BUS CPFF
SERVICES 65
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
MILLER
MATH IS
LAU
LIVINGSTONE .H^'
FOR 68-W1-0016
RICHARDS
WILLIAMS
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
09/29/90
03/22/99
03/27/91
03/26/95
09/30/90
09/30/93
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68W90064
H900042A3
68W10Q16
W101095Q1
68D00171
D000479M1
TECH.SUPP. OF OTTRS/ORD
SMALL BUS CPAF
SERVICES 65
MURPHY
RICHARD FETZER
01/31/92
01/30/93
68S23002
W284066F3
REGION III EMERGENCY CLEANUP SERVICES
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SB ARE A AREAS
C 03C
7035
X
C 72C
R408
E
C 266 604 267
R421
C
C 3 AS 03S
F108
A
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
1,663,196
03/22/99
5,595,219
685,000
03/26/95
1,997,646
490,000
09/30/93
1,182,591
2,656,316
01/30/97
147,987,744
ENVIRONMENTAL TECH INC
P 0 BOX 1236
3705 SAUNDERS AVE
RICHMOND VA 23277
ENVIRONMENTAL TECH INC
P 0 BOX 1236
3705 SAUNDERS AVE
RICHMOND VA 23277
ENVIROSYSTEMS, INC.
9300 RL'MSEY ROAD
COLUMBIA MD 21045
EQUITY ASSOCIATES INC
P.O. BOX 296
KNOXVILLE TN 37901
EXTREL CORPORATION
240 ALPHA DRIVE
PITTSBURGH PA 15238
FISHER, SAMUEL M
GS3 BLDG SUITE 802
PHILADELPHIA PA 19131
SMALL BUS CPFF WALKER
SERVICES 65 BOTTS
EMERGENCY RESPONSE CLEAN-UP SERVICES
SMALL BUS CR IDES
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JARVELA
REGION 3 MINI ERCS ROUND 2
08/17/91
09/30/92
68S14002 C
W066032F4 F108
X
04/05/89 68W90026 C
04/05/93 WA86H051 F112
A
SMALL BUS
SERVICES
FP
65
BERND
CARASEA
07/15/91
01/14/94
CHEM ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
68D10064 AS
D101861R1 F999
A
SMALL BUS CPFF TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 KREMER
SUPPORT SERVICES/CERI/CI
LARGE BUS FP SINK
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
THREE RIVERS ANAYTICAL ORGANICS
SMALL BUS FP
SERVICES 65
AUDIT SERVICES-A
JONES
HISNIEWSKI
02/20/90 68C00013 S
12/31/92 C90545RB1 H299
D
12/30/87 68W80020 AS
03/31/99 W800760D1 F999
X
03/17/89 68W90010 C
10/30/92 W805713A2 R704
04D 4AD
3AS
72F
26S
72F
356
1,660,000
08/16/96
22,329,620
8,168,544
04/04/92
11,535,330
190,091
01/14/94
1,900,910
1,657,362
12/31/91
5,887,286
1,226,678
03/31/99
2,219,580
694,914
03/16/93
2,496,720
0'
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
II
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
13
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C-CLASS
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
FLUOR DANIEL
12790 MERIT DRIVE
SUITE 200
DALLAS TX 75257
FOUR SEASONS INDUST SERV
3107 SOUTH ELM-EUGENE
GREENSBORO NC 27416
FOXX & COMPANY
700 GOODALL COMPLX
324 WEST 9TH STREET
CINCINNATI OH 45202
FW ENVIRESPONSE INC.
110 S. ORANGE AVE.
LIVINGSTON NJ 07039
GANNETT FLEMING ENVIRON
ENGINEERING INC
P.O.BOX 1963
HARRISBURG PA 17105
GANNETT FLEMING, INC.
PO BOX 1963
HARRISBURG PA 17105
GANNETT FLEMING, INC.
PO BOX 1963
HARRISBURG PA 17105
GENERAL SCIENCES CORPORATOIN
6100 CHEVY CHASE DR.
LAUREL MD 20707
GRANTS ASSOCIATES
308 LANIDEX PLAZA
PARSIPPANY NJ 07054
GUARDIAN CONSTRUCTION CO.
1280 PORTER RD.
BEAR DE 19701
LARGE BUS CPAF KALWEI
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 SIEMENSKI
AWARD OF ARCS CONTRACT
01/06/89 68W90013 C
01/05/99 H905805F7 F108
X
LARGE BUS CPFF JAMISON 08/17/91 68S14005 C
SERVICES 65 BOTTS 08/31/92 H186116F4 F108
EMERGENCY RESPONSE CLEAN-UP SERVICES GREENSBORO, NC X
SMALL BUS CPFF STERN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 SKAHN
CONSTRUCTION QUALITY MGMT. 'IMPLEMENTATION
09/28/90 68W00050 S
09/27/92 W000931D1 R702
LARGE BUS CPAF REYNOLDS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MASTERS
ETEC.SUP./RREL/EDISON
LARGE BUS TM RIVERSO
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 HARGROVE
PREP.OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STUDIES
LARGE BUS CPFF HOUSER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 DAN WELKER
EIS t NEPA RELATED STUDY - REGION III
LARGE BUS TM
SERVICES 65
NEPA STUDIES - REG.
SMALL BUS CPFF
TECHNICAL SRVC 65
EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
MUELLER
IV
HOUSER
DELPIRE
& MODELING SUPPORT
SMALL BUS TM RIVERSO
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 LIVINGSTON
PUBLIC NOTICE ADVERTISING FOR REG.II
SMALL BUS CPAF GAWIN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JARVELA
REGION III MINI ERCS ROUND II
09/30/89 68C90033 C
09/30/94 C90905RB1 F101
X
01/27/89 68R90003 C
09/11/92 D800088Q2 F110
X
09/27/91 68D10132 C
09/30/92 D100321N1 F099
X
07/18/91 68R10004 C
12/31/92 D000695Q4 B510
X
07/02/90 68D00080 C
06/30/93 D901372L1 F401
A
09/14/90 68R00003 S
09/13/92 D000722Q2 R701
D
04/05/89 68W90027 C
04/04/92 H901848C1 F112
C
06 L
04D 4AD
72E
62C
62C
030 03S 03X
03U 03X
36H
69E 69T 69C
69E 69T
02K
3AS
7,511,599
01/05/99
143,397,748
1,434,500
08/16/96
23,933,476
140,000
09/27/92
260,666
9,928,448
09/30/94
72,391,783
714,163
04/30/92
3,204,738
388,100
09/30/94
2,588,548
342,341
12/31/93
0
1,129,768
06/30/93
2,022,013
96,316
09/13/92
160,000
6,394,695
04/04/92
9,875,559
A-
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/93
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPAH3 65*65:
PAGE
14
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
HEALTH RESOURCES
304 CAMBRIDGE
WOBURN MA 01801
HEWLETT-PACKARD CO
M 120 CENTURY RD
PARAMUS NJ 07652
I T ANALYTICAL SERVICES
165 FIELDCREST AVE
EDISON NJ 08837
I T ANALYTICAL SERVICES
5815 MIDDLEBROOK PIKE
KNOXVILLE TN 37921
I T ANALYTICAL SERVICES
11499 CHESTER ROAD
CINCINNATI OH 45246
I T ANALYTICAL SERVICES
17605 FABRICA HAY
CERRITOS CA 90701
IBM CORP
FEDERAL SYSTEMS DIV
18100 FREDERICK PIKE
GAITHERSBURG MD 20760
IBM CORP
6705 ROCKLEDGE DR.
BETHESDA MD 20817
ICF INC
9300 LEE HMY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
ICF INC
9300 LEE HWY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
ICF INC
ICF TECHNOLOGY INC
399 THORNALL STREET
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS FP KIRBY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BEDDOHS
SERVICES FOR MEDICAL MONITORING - REG.
LARGE BUS FP KASTNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 GOLDBERG
MAINTENANCE OF HP LAB EQUIPMENT
LARGE BUS FP SIMMONS
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
EFF-DATE CONTRACT
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR
02/02/90 68000002
09/30/92 D900256N1
I
10/01/89 68R90006
09/30/92 D901163Q2
09/28/90 68D00164
03/27/93 D001859R1
LARGE BUS FP BERND 07/15/91 68D10094
SERVICES 65 BARRON 01/14/94 D101870R1
CHEM ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
LARGE BUS FP BERND 08/12/91 68D10091
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER 02/11/94 D101867R1
CHAM ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
LARGE BUS FP BERND 07/31/91 68D10090
SERVICES 65 BANKERT 02/13/94 D101864R1
CHEM ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
LARGE BUS FP LOVERDE
DATA PROCESSING 65 MATHIS
IMAGE PROCESSING SYSTEM
LARGE BUS FP LOVERDE
DATA PROCESSING 65 WORLEY
ADP EQUIPMENT
LARGE BUS CPFF DANLEY
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 GIBSON
REG REFORM
LARGE BUS CPAF BERND
SERVICES 65 BARON
QUALITY ASSURANCE TECHNICAL SUPPORT
LARGE BUS CPAF HEAVER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 ALVI
FUNDING ARCS REGION II - ICF
11/22/89 68W00005
09/30/95 H802625A3
09/30/89 68W90076
12/31/96 H900166A3
09/22/89 66W90080
09/30/92 H802040A2
02/15/89 68D90041
02/15/93 W802712D1
09/30/88 68H80124
09/30/98 H805637D1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
C 01S
2201
X
S 02K
J099
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72 F
F999
X
AS 72 F
F999
X
C 42F
7010
X
C 54D
5045
X
C 41C
H999
X
C 72F
F999
X
C 72E
C214
X
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
321,665
09/30/92
305,450
324,623
09/30/92
324,623
184,800
03/27/93
1,848,000
483,450
01/14/94
2,320,560
450,450
02/11/94
2,162,160
438,900
02/13/94
2,106,720
4,218,028
09/30/95
70,100,000
6,245,036
12/31/96
126,082,750
3,040,850
09/21/92
4,923,678
8,647,289
02/14/92
11,493,574
10,289,794
09/30/98
62,500,386
EDISON NJ
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65-.
PAGE
15
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
ICF INC
9300 LEE HWY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
ICF INC
9300 LEE HWY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
ICF INC
9300 LEE HWY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
ICF INC
9300 LEE HWY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
ICF INC
1850 K ST NW
SUITE 950
WASHINGTON DC 20006
ICF INC
9300 LEE HWY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
ICF INC
9300 LEE HWY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
ICF INC
9300 LEE HWY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
ICF INC
9300 LEE HWY
FAIRFAX VA 22031
IIT RSRCH INST
10 WEST 35TH ST
CHICAGO IL 60616
INDUSTRIAL & ENVIRON ANALYST
PO BOX 12846
RES TRI PARK NC 27709
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPFF BAKER
SERVICES 65 RUBY DOUGLAS
OSW REGULATORY SUPPORT
LARGE BUS CPFF CAFFREY
SERVICES 65 CARLOS LAGO
SUPPORT OF WA 4 t 5
LARGE BUS CPAF SIMMONS
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 SAMOLIS
ICF TECHNOLOGY
LARGE BUS CPFF MONTFORD
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 DAVID LEVY
TECHNICAL SUPPORT - USED OIL
LARGE BUS CPAF BAKER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JOSH BAYLSON
UST SUPPORT
LARGE BUS CPFF BOYD
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 C. ENGLERT
INCREMENTAL FUNDING ttnv±»m
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
01/01/90
12/02/93
05/01/89
09/30/92
06/28/89
06/30/99
09/10/89
08/31/92
05/25/90
05/24/92
05/18/90
04/30/93
LARGE BUS CPFF DOUGLAS 10/01/89
SERVICES 65 SAMMY !*<*- 09/30/92
REGULATORY AN D ECONOMIS ANALYSIS SUPPORT
LARGE BUS CPFF ADAMS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BARLES
POLICY & TECH. ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS CPAF PRESNELL
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BEASLEY L^*"5
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ASSISTANCE TEAMS
f-c-A-r
09/28/90
09/30/92
09/30/92
- ZONE II
CJ-yl-* |
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF HOUSER 12/09/87
RESEARCH & DEV 65 MULICK 09/30/92
LAB DEV. & FIELD TEST. OF ENV.MONIT. METHODS
SMALL BUS FP BERND 07/15/91
SERVICES 65 BARRON 01/14/94
CHEM ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
CONTRACT
RFP-NSR
68H00009
W900043E1
66W90030
W803230E1
68M90059
H902608D2
68W90081
W800163E1
66M00024
W902945E1
68M00022
W901076E1
68W90082
W900044E1
68C00083
C00930WB1
6SD10135
D100107R1
68D80002
DU87B105
68D10092
D101868R1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
C 31R
F999
X
C 31P
F999
X
C 09K
C214
X
C 31H
R528
X
C 88M
F999
X
C 75E
R408
X
C 88M
F999
X
C 28C 06P 02K
R498 09L 20R
X
C 04T 72F 07W
F999
X
C 60E
AH92
X
AS 72F
F999
X
CUH.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
7,549,738
12/02/93
12,450,622
2,105,944
04/30/92
3,588,845
3,953,586
06/30/99
75,161,112
5,812,467
08/31/92
14,111,667
5,263,811
05/25/92
9,753,282
2,760,000
04/30/93
9,364,535
710,000
09/30/92
5,698,766
5,372,719
09/30/93
14,389,710
9,374,546
09/30/95
69,370,613
1,703,669
09/30/92
4,914,970
465,300
01/14/94
2,233,440
O O !> T
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
16
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
INDUSTRIAL 4 ENVIRON ANALYST
PO BOX 12846
RES TRI PARK NC 27709
INDUSTRIAL & ENVIRON ANALYST
200 MONROE TURNPIKE
MONROE CT 06468
INFO SYSTEMS&NETHORKS CORP
10411 MOTOR CITY DRIVE
BETHESDA MD 20817
INFORMATION DYNAMICS> INC.
7313 WOODMONT AVE.
BETHESDA MD 2081*
INTEGRATION TECHNOLOGIES
2745 HARTLAND ROAD
FALLS CHURCH VA 22043
INTERGRATED LABRATORY SYSTEM
P.O. BOX 13501
RSRCH TRI PK NC 27709
IOWA, UNIV OF
HYGIENIC LAB
IOWA CITY IA 52242
ITEP ASSOCIATES, INC
CHESTER TOWERS
11499 CHESTER RD
CINCINNATI OH 45246
ITEP ASSOCIATES, INC
CHESTER TOWERS
11499 CHESTER RD
CINCINNATI OH 45246
JACOBS ENG CO
521 S LAKE AVE
PASADENA CA 91109
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP BERNO
SERVICES 65 HURD
EFF-DATE CONTRACT
EXP-DATE RFP-fCR
09/28/90 68D00156
03/27/93 D001856R1
07/15/91 68D10082
01/14/94 D101Q57R1
CHEM ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
SMALL BUS FP KHATARI
DATA PROCESSING 65 BRUCE ALMICH
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUPPORT
SMALL BUS TM FULTON
DATA PROCESSING 65 SCHWARZ
INOVATIVE ELECTRIC REPORTING
SMALL BUS FP AMES
DATA PROCESSING 65 DAVID M CLINE
ORD MODERNIZATION II
SMALL BUS CPFF LLOYD
RESEARCH & DEV 65 BENSON
QA SUPPORT - HERL
NON/PRFT UNIV FP BERND
SERVICES 65 BANKERT
D000463R1-ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS CPFF OPPERMAN
SERVICES 65 SIMES
TECH. SUP. SERV. QA/QC PROG./RREL
LARGE BUS CPFF OPPERMAN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 POWERS
09/26/90 68H00040
09/30/92 H903235A3
09/24/91 68W10048
06/15/92 H101801A3
09/23/91 68W10046
09/30/96 H102857A3
04/05/89 68D90050
09/30/93 D900055M1
09/28/90 68D00154
03/27/93 D001920R1
02/14/90 68C00015
09/30/92 C9R0182B1
06/01/90 68C00016
09/30/92 C90927RB1
DURABLE FIBER ABATEMENT TECH. ENG. SERVICES
LARGE BUS CPAF DURDEN
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KAREN FLOURNEY
START UP FUNDING/ARCS CONTRACT IN ZONE
09/30/88 68W80122
09/30/98 W805756D2
VI, VII, & VIII
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
AS 72F
F999
A
AS 72F
F999
X
S 54D
7010
D
S 41D
D306
D
C 55M
7010
A
S 61H
H199
D
AS 72F
F999
X
C 62C
AZ11
X
C 62C
R599
X
C 72E
C214
X
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
486 , 925
03/27/93
3,849,120
412,218
01/14/94
1,779,360
1,890,158
3,224,811
59,995
08/15/92
0
21,500
09/30/96
41,693,827
104,300
09/30/93
1,055,762
277,530
03/27/93
1,914,000
417,000
09/30/92
1,123,065
757,771
09/30/92
2,263,113
10,398,656
09/30/98
150,241,713
N
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
VEND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
17
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
JOHN E. DOWELL D
0-HELL BOX 39069
P.O. BOX 39069
TACOMA WA 98499
JW.K INTERNATIONAL CORP.
7617 LITTLE RIVER TURNPIKE
ANNANDALE VA 22003
KEYDATA SYSTEMS INC
6411 IVY LANE
GREENBELT MD 20770
KEYSTONE ENVIRON RESOURCES
SPECTRIX/MONROEVILLE DIV
440 COLLEGE PARK DR.
MONROEVILLE PA 15146
KEYSTONE ENVIRON RESOURCES
SPECTRIX-HOUSTON
3911 FORDREN
HOUSTON TX 77063
LABAT-ANDERSON
1111 L9TH ST. NORTH
ARLINGTON VA 22209
LABAT-ANDERSON
2200 CLARENDON BLVD.
SUITE 900
ARLINGTON VA 22209
LABAT-ANDERSON
1111 L9TH ST. NORTH
ARLINGTON VA 22209
LANCASTER LABS INC.
2425 NEW HOLLAND PIKE
LANCASTER PA 17601
LAUCKS TESTING LABORATORIES
940 S HARNEY
SEATTLE WA 98108
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE CONTRACT
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE RFP-NBR
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS FP WEANT
SERVICES 65 DAVIS
JANITORIAL SVCS-EPA-REGION 10
LARGE BUS CPFF HOUSER
RESEARCH & DEV 65 HULL
SUPP.TO EPA QUAL.ASSUR. TRAINING PROGRAM
SMALL BUS CPFF KHATRI
DATA PROCESSING 65 LINDA JONES
SUPPORT FOR ORDIS
LARGE BUS FP SIMMONS
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
(D000461R1)
LARGE BUS FP PRESNELL
SERVICES 65 HURD
(D000461R1)
SMALL BUS TM WITHER
SERVICES 65 LINDA GARRISON
AGENCY-WIDE LIBRARY SERVICES AND RECORDS
SMALL BUS CPFF OPPERMAN
SERVICES 65
10/29/90 68D00104
09/30/93 D000983N1
09/29/90 68D00105
09/30/92 D000147M1
07/01/89 68H90078
09/30/92 W901655A3
09/25/90 68D00148
03/24/93 D001827R1
09/25/90 68D00147
03/25/93 D001828R1
06/01/89 68W90052
09/30/92 W900514A2
MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
10/31/91 68C20100
09/30/92 C101360T1
TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF
SMALL BUS CPFF CUNNINGHAM
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 T< JOVER
IMPL. SUPP. FOR SARA, TITLE III, ft TRADE
SMALL BUS FP SIMMONS
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
SMALL BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
07/26/88 \l°6B»B01 08
07/16/9^ W801450E1
SECRET PROC.
09/28/90 68D00155
03/27/93 D001860R1
09/28/90 68D00153
03/28/93 D001855R1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBLGS
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM MAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
S
S201
D
C
R999
X
S
D302
D
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
X
S
R605
D
C
L099
X
S
F101
D
AS
F999
A
AS
F999
A
10H 201,814
09/30/93
97,330
60U 442,559
09/30/92
992,060
265 26R 265 1,774,391
09/30/92
7,200,000
72F 266,799
03/24/93
551,760
72F 189,667
03/25/93
551,760
55R 20,942,093
05/31/94
81,986,815
/^31R / 26S 52E 307,000
^~tti$ 32W 09/30/95
4,942,840
75E 1,329,000
07/16/92,
2,393,079
72F 695,310
03/27/93
1,940,400
72F 565,444
03/28/93
1,874,400
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
18
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
LEONARD G. BIRNBAUM 4 CO
6285 FRANCONIA ROAD
ALEXANDRIA VA 22310
LEONARD G. BIRNBAUM & CO
6285 FRANCONIA ROAD
ALEXANDRIA VA 22310
LOCKHEED AIRCRAFT CORP
^ENGINEERING & MGT SRVC INC
1830 NASA ROAD ONE
HOUSTON TX 77058
LOCKHEED AIRCRAFT CORP
^ENGINEERING & MGT SRVC INC
1830 NASA ROAD ONE
HOUSTON TX 77058
LOCKHEED ENGINEERING SCI CO
TWO CORPORATE PLAZA
2625 BAY AREA BLVD.
HOUSTON TX 77058
LOS GATOS CIRCUITS INC
634 GIBRALTER CT
MILPITAS CA 95035
LOUIS PROVENZANO INC.
180 WEST BROADWAY
NEW YORK NY 10013
M.L. ENERGIA, INC
P.O. BOX 1468
PRINCETON NJ 08542
MALCOLM PIRINIE INC
Z CORPORATE PARK DR.
WHITE PLAINS NY 10602
MALCOLM PIRINIE INC
100 EISENHOWER DR PO BOX 36
PARAMUS NJ 07653
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS TM LUTZ
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 A. GRAND
AUDIT SERVICES - F
SMALL BUS TM LUTZ
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 CYR
SUPERFUND AUDIT SERVICES
LARGE BUS CPAF REYNOLDS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 DENSON
ON-SITE TECH. SUP. /EMSL/LV
LARGE BUS CPAF REYNOLDS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JACKSON
CONTRACT 68C00050
LARGE BUS CPAF BERND
SERVICES 65 BEASLEY N U{|i|J
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICE ASSISTANCE TEAMS -
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65;
PAGE
19
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
MARASCO NEWTON GROUP LTD
1600 WILSON BLVD.
SUITE 1200
ARLINGTON VA 32209
MATH TECH INC.
P 0 BOX 2392
PRINCETON NJ 08540
MCBRIDE, LOCK & ASSOCIATES
1221 BALTIMORE AVE.SUITE406
KANSAS CITY MO 64105
MCCOY & MCCOY
85 EAST NOEL AVENUE
MADISONVILLE, KY 42431
MEMEBRANE TECH & RSRCH INC
1360 WILLOW RD
MENLO PARK CA 94025
METCALF A EDDY INC.
PO BOX 4043
KOBURN MA 01888
METCALF S EDDY, INC
6480 BUSCH BLVD. SUITE 200
COLUMBUS OH 43229
MIDWEST RSRCH INST
"BIOLOGICAL SCI DIV
425 VOLKER BLVD
KANSAS CITY MO 64110
MITCHELL SYSTEMS CORP
1300 NEW YORK AVE NW
SUITE 200W
WASHINGTON DC 20005
MITRE CORP
WESTGATE RSRCH PARK
MCLEAN VA 22102
TYPE COST
EFFORT PC
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS CPFF
MANAGEMENT CONS 65
MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
GRAY 12/18/91
FRANCES J HANAVAN 12/17/92
FOR THE SUPERFUND PROGRAM
LARGE BUS CPFF HINTON
SERVICES 65 LONG, J.
MARKET & ECON.ANAL.OF NEW « EXIST. CHEM.*
SMALL BUS TM
TECHNICAL SRVC 65
AUDIT SERVICES - D
LARGE BUS FP
SERVICES 65
CHEM ANAL SERVICES
SMALL BUS FP
RESEARCH & DEV 65
SBIR-II
LEWIS
MURRAY
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68H20003
W100045D1
09/28/68 68080087
06/30/92 D800159L1
INDUST. SECTORS
09/06/88
11/05/92
BERND 07/15/91
BARRON 01/14/94
FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
LLOYD
CAREY
LARGE BUS CPAF KELLEY
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 BARMAKIAN
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES
LARGE BUS CPAF
SERVICES 65
INCREMENTAL FUNDING
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF
SERVICES 65
ANAL METHODS DEVELP
SMALL BUS CPFF
MANAGEMENT CONS 65
SEL.ASST.IN DESIGN
FED RESEARCH CPFF
MANAGEMENT CONS 65
NPL SUPPORT
CAFFREY
PERRY, B
OPPERMAN
WERNER BECKERT
& EVAL, SAMPLE ANAL,
LLOYD
GANT
t CONDUCT OF ORD MGMT.
SHARPE
ABERNATHY ftUA^0^
08/27/91
11/27/92
04/01/89
03/31/99
03/31/89
03/31/94
07/10/91
09/30/94
& QA TECH
03/17/89
09/30/93
ISSUES
12/31/89
12/31/92
68W30118
W805710A2
68D10081
D101856R1
68D10072
D102196M1
68W90036
W901670D1
68W90007
W901571E1
68C10029
C100019RB
SUPPORT
68D90040
D900047M1
68M00008
W902144E2
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBLGS
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM . MAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
C 72C
R799
C
C 69T
F106
X
C 356
R704
C
AS 72 F
F999
X
C 26T
AH11
C
C 01P
C214
X
C 05F
F999
X
C 60J
AH90
X
S 265
R599
D
S 72F
C129
X
955,336
12/18/95
8,934,093
957,500
06/30/92
1,869,909
622,371
09/05/93
2,214,000
368,500
01/14/94
0
150,000
11/27/92
150,000
12,893,428
03/31/99
138,407,988
24,536,169
03/31/94
30,274,356
602,262
09/30/94
4,468,776
2,211,940
09/30/93
6,138,299
10,000,000
12/31/92
15,000,000
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
FK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
20
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
MORRISON KNUDSEN-FERGUSON CO
1120 LINCOLN ST
DENVER CO 80205
NANCY LOW & ASSOCIATES INC
5454 WISCONSIN AVENUE
SUITE 1500
CHEVY CHASE MD 20815
NATIONAL PATENT DEV. CORP
202 PERRY PARKWAY
GAITHERSBURG MD 20877
NFT INC.
409 CORPORATE CIRCLE
GOLDEN CO 80401
NORTHROP CORP
^NORTHROP SRVCS INC
P 0 BOX 12313
RSRCH TRI PK NC 27709
NORTHROP CORP
*HORTHROP SRVCS INC
P 0 BOX 12313
RSRCH TRI PK NC 27709
NORTHROP CORP
*NORTHROP SRVCS INC
P 0 BOX 12313
RSRCH TRI PK NC 27709
NUS CORPORTATION
910 CLOPPER RD
GAITHERSBURG MD 20878
NUS CORPORTATION
910 CLOPPER RD
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPAF ERNST
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
03/31/89
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 JAMES HANLEY REG III 03/31/99
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SUPPORT CH2M HILL
SMALL BUS CPFF BAKER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 DEBBIE RUTHERFORD
COMMUNICATION & MARKETING SUPPORT
LARGE BUS FP SIMMONS
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
(D000461R1)
SMALL BUS FP PRESNELL
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER
CHEM ANAL SVCS FOR INORGANICS! SET-ASIDE
LARGE BUS CPAF ENINGER/DR
SERVICES 65 FRANK
TECH . ADM . SUP . SER V/COR V
LARGE BUS CPAF REYNOLDS
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 COSBY
TECH. SUP. SERV. FOR ADA/ ADA
LARGE BUS CPAF HOUSER
RESEARCH & DEV 65 BUFALINI
ON-SITE RES. SUPP. TO AREAL
LARGE BUS CPAF SHARPE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FREDERICKS ,4U=TT
FIT, ZONE I
LARGE BUS CPAF OZER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 STEPHAINE DEL RE
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION
06/29/90
05/24/92
09/25/90
03/24/93
09/24/90
03/27/93
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68W90025
W901560D1
68H00030
W003785E1
68D00146
D001826R1
68D00145
D000873R1
OR D000461R1)
02/20/88
09/30/92
06/16/88
09/30/92
09/30/90
06/30/93
11/01/86
10/30/92
01/01/88
12/31/97
III - NUS
68C80006
CI87R383
68C80025
C8R0001B1
66000106
D000203M1
68017346
MA85K051
68H80037
W801662D1
C-CLASS
PROD/SRVC
SB ARE A
C
C214
X
C
F999
A
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
C
C
AZ11
X
C
AZ11
X
C
F999
X
C
F999
X
C
C214
X
REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBLGS
FUNDING PROGRAM MAX.EXP
AREAS MAX.POTVAL
08L 7,805,632
03/31/99
155,373,447
88M 342,500
06/28/93
3,973,416
72F 90,783
03/24/93
475,200
72F 216,817
03/27/93
480,480
035 63M 35,368,247
02/28/92
35,181,444
63L 7,701,376
09/30/92
7,099,528
60E 63M 60E 10,605,037
02K 60E 06/30/95
39,841,195
72E 98,471,000
10/30/92
125,864,397
72E 35,650,949
12/31/97
216,027,085
"T
GAITHERSBURG MD 20878
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
il
04/08/92
VEND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
21
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
NUS CORPORTATION
910 CLOPPER RD
GAITHERSBURG MD 20878
NYTEST ENVIRONMENTAL
60 SEAVIEW BLVD
PORT WASHINGTON NY 11050
NYTEST ENVIRONMENTAL
60 SEAVIEW BLVD
PORT WASHINGTON NY 11050
NYTEST ENVIRONMENTAL
60 SEAVIEW BLVD
PORT WASHINGTON NY 11050
0. H. MATERIALS, INC.
P. 0. BOX 551
FINDLAY OH 45840
0. H. MATERIALS, INC.
P. 0. BOX 551
FINDLAY OH 45840
0. H. MATERIALS, INC.
P. 0. BOX 551
FINDLAY OH 45840
OHM REMEDIATION SERV CORP
16406 U.S. ROUTE
224 EAST
FINDLAY OH 45839-055
OHM REMEDIATION SERV CORP
16406 U.S. ROUTE
224 EAST
FINDLAY OH 45839-055
ORGANIZATIONAL DYNAMICS
1000 THOMAS JEFFERSON ST.
SUITE 606
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
PROJECT TITLE
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
LARGE BUS CPAF ZENI 09/16/88 68W80117
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KELLEY 09/15/98 W805357D1
START UP FUNDING FOR PROGRAM MGMT. FOR REGION/WITH NUS
LARGE BUS FP BERND 05/15/91 68D10030
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER 11/14/93 D100009R1
CHEM. ANAL. SVCS. -HIGH CONCENT . INORGANIC ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP SIMMONS, J.L. 02/29/88
SERVICES 65 CARASEA 05/29/99
CHEMICAL ANALYTICAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
CHEM. ANAL
FP BERND
65 CARASEA
.SERVICES FOR ORGANICS
LARGE BUS FP ERICKSON
SERVICES 65 FORD
REMOVAL ACTION/SITE SPEC. CANTON, MS
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
ERCS ZONE
TM YOUNGER f
65 TIDWELL , PA
1
LARGE BUS CPAF JAMISON
SERVICES 65 STROUD
ERCS - ZONE 2
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
EMERGENCY
LARGE BUS
SERVICES
EMERGENCY
07/15/91
01/14/94
09/26/90
09/24/92
07/31/87
04/30/92
06/30/87
12/27/£2
«tl
CPAF JAMISON 06/30/91
65 CAROL MONELL 08/01/92
FIRST RESPONSE CLEAN UP SERVICES REGION
CPFF WALKER
65 BOTTS
RESPONSE CLEANUP SVCS FINDLAY,
LARGE BUS FP MURPHY
EQUIPMENT 65 KERRY WEISS
LICENSE TO PRINT TQM COPYRIGHT MA
08/17/91
11/06/92
OH
04/26/91
09/30/92
68W80049
W800935D1
68D10079
D100455R1
68S04001
W086168F4
68017445
WA86H190
68017404
WA87H355
68S14001
H986104F4
IV
68S14003
W186116F4
68H10036
W101061A2
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBLGS
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM MAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
C 72E
C214
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
C 4AD
F108
X
C 72D
F099
X
C 72D
F099
X
A 04D 4AD
F108
X
C 04D 4AD
F108
X
S 85M
8742
X
13,926,275
09/15/98
148,365,398
25,080
11/14/93
250,800
338,459
05/29/99
764,500
313,500
01/14/94
313,500
1,682,806
09/24/92
1,682,806
128,434,908
01/31/92
136,060,982
36,838,009
12/27/9*'* /
36,838,009
1,666,113
06/29/96
26,465,195
2,324,750
08/16/96
23,228,090
235,350
04/25/94
720,000
WASHINGTON DC 20007
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
22
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
PACE LABORATORIES
9608 LARIET BOULEVARD
LENEXA KS 66319
PACE LABORATORIES
1710 DOUGLAS DRIVE N
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55422
PACIFIC ANALYTICAL INC
1989 PALOMAR OAKS
WAY SUITE B
CARLSBAD CA 92000
PACIFIC ENVIRON SERVICES
HERNDON PKWY SUITE 200
HERNDON VA 22070
PEER CONSULTANTS INC
1160 ROCKVILLE PIKE
ROCKVILLE MD 20852
PEER CONSULTANTS INC
1160 ROCKVILLE PIKE
ROCKVILLE MD 20852
PEER CONSULTANTS INC
1160 ROCKVILLE PIKE
ROCKVILLE MD 20652
PEI ASSOCIATES, INC
CHESTER TOWERS
11499 CHESTER RD
CINCINNATI OH 45246
PERKIN ELMER CORP
MAIN AVE
NORWALK CT 06856
PIPKINS GROUP
994 DANA AVE
CINCINNATI OH 45229
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 BANKERT
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
08/14/91
02/13/94
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68D10086
D101863R1
CHEM ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
SMALL BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER
07/31/91
01/30/94
68D10089
D101865R1
CHEM ANAL. SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
SMALL BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 BANKERT
08/16/91
02/15/94
66D10098
D101872R1
CHEM ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
SMALL BUS CPFF MEANT
RESEARCH & DEV 65 DONALDSON
TECH. SUPP. FOR AIR POLL. CONTROL PROGRAMS
SMALL BUS CPFF AHLQUIST
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BARKLEY
H.W.PEER REV. TECH. SUP/HWERL/CI
SMALL BUS CPFF SAVAGE/LH
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 LIGHT
PEER REVIEW SUP. ORD. LABS/HER L/CI
SMALL BUS CPAF TOPPING
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 SARNO
ENG. SERVICES FOR REMEDIAL OF HAZARDOUS
LARGE BUS TM MARTINEZ
SERVICES 65 DAVID OUDERKIRK
09/28/90
09/30/92
10/01/87
09/30/92
10/01/87
09/30/92
09/15/87
09/30/92
68D00124
D000309N1
68033490
CIQ7R280
68033470
CI87R282
68017448
WA87J093
HASTE SITES
09/29/87
09/30/92
68017460
WA66H191
EMERGENCY RESPONSE CLEANUP SERVICES - ZONE III
LARGE BUS FP ROGERS
DATA PROCESSING 65 SHACKELFORD
LIMS
SMALL BUS CPFF TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MORRISON
MAILROOM SERVICES
09/18/87
09/30/92
09/30/90
09/30/93
68017440
HA66D342
68C00084
C01375FB1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
C 53F 53B
AH21
A
S 62B
AZ11
D
S 62C
AZ11
0
C 72E
C211
D
C 72D
F999
X
C 54D
7010
X
S 52E
R533
D
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
431,200
02/13/94
2,069,760
439,367
01/30/94
2,108,960
263,208
02/15/94
2,632,080
4,700,391
09/30/93
12,325,762
1,236,760
09/30/92
1,141,760
636,680
09/30/92
626,680
8,720,722
09/30/92
21,252,561
52,469,819
12/31/91
64,269,698
2,994,424
09/30/92
4,000,000
672,797
09/30/93
5,090,419
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
23
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C-CUSS
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM.
AREAS
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
PIPKINS GROUP
994 DANA AVE
CINCINNATI OH 45229
PLANNING RSRCH CORP
*PRC COMPUTER CEN
7600 OLD SPRINGHOUSE RD
MCLEAN VA 22101
PRC ENVIRON MANAGE INC.
120 HOWARD ST., SUITE 700
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105
PRC ENVIRON MGMT. INC.
303 E. WACKER DR. SUITE 500
CHICAGO IL 60601
PRC ENVIRON MGMT. INC.
303 E. WACKER DR. SUITE 500
CHICAGO IL 60601
PRC ENVIRON MGMT. INC.
303 E. WACKER DR. SUITE 500
CHICAGO IL 60601
PRC ENVIRON MGMT. INC.
303 E. WACKER DR. SUITE 500
CHICAGO IL 60601
PRC ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT.
1505 PLANNING RESEARCH OR
MCLEAN VA 22201
MCLEAN VA 22101
SMALL BUS FP TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 PANLIKAS
TECHNICAL/ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
LARGE BUS TM SWITZER
DATA PROCESSING 65 DALY
GENERAL PROGRAMMING ADP SUPPORT SERVICES
01/19/90 68C00010 S
09/30/92 C90924RB1 T001
D
11/19/66
08/18/92
68017361
WA85G150
LARGE BUS CPAF KELLY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 NANCY DECK
TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT ZONE IV
LARGE BUS CPAF LUEDERS
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ALLEN PEARCE
PLANNING PR FY88 (REGION VI-X)
12/02/88
12/02/93
LARGE BUS CPAF CONNER 04/28/88
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KUSH 03/31/98
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION V - PRC
LARGE BUS CPAF WISE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FRIETSCH
TECH. SUPPORT FOR SITE PROGRAM-SITE A
LARGE BUS CPAF CAFFREY
SERVICES 65 PERRY, BiUUlt-
INCREMENTAL FUNDING
LARGE BUS CPFF LAU
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 DEKAY
OSWER TRAINING SUPPORT
C
R302
X
68W90009 C
W900282E1 R421
X
03/31/89 68W90041 C
03/31/93 H800257E1 R421
X
68W80084 C
W802858D1 C214
X
09/26/90 68C00047 C
09/25/95 C00206RB1 R421
X
03/31/89 68W90006 C
03/31/94 W901570E1 F999
X
07/09/90 68H00034 C
07/08/94 W902250E1 U009
X
62C
55M
81A
10Q
06 L
72E
62C
05F
75K
09K 06L
522,482
09/30/92
668,476
51,613,289
03/31/92
116,043,028
27,709,833
12/02/93
30,262,828
10,594,619
03/31/93
10,446,769
23,099,250
03/31/98
211,963,386
16,274,054
09/26/95
32,864,232
23,431,265
03/31/94
29,887,229
3,565,555
07/08/94
7,200,000
ri
PRECISION COMBUSTION INC
25 SCIENCE PARK
N
EW HAVEN CT 06511
PRIME COMPUTER INC
1600 RESEARCH BLVD. RM 101
ROCKVILLE MD 20850
SMALL BUS
RESEARCH t
SBIR-II
FP
DEV 65
LLOYD
CAREY
LARGE BUS FP LAM
DATA PROCESSING 65 SHIREY
PRIME HARDWARE MAINTENANCE
09/12/91 68D10103 C 26T
09/12/93 D100002M1 AH11
C
10/01/89 68W90087 C 55B
09/30/94 W901125A3 7035
X
150,000
09/12/93
150,000
2,180,576
09/30/94
6,461,291
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
II
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
24
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
RADIAN CORP
8501 MO-PAC BLVD
P.O. BOX 201088
AUSTIN TX 78720
RADIAN CORP
8501 MO-PAC BLVD
P.O. BOX 201088
AUSTIN TX 78720
RADIAN CORP
8501 MO-PAC BLVD
P.O. BOX 201088
AUSTIN TX 78720
RADIAN CORP
8501 MO-PAC BLVD
P.O. BOX 201088
AUSTIN TX 78720
RADIAN CORP
8501 MO-PAC BLVD
P.O. BOX 201088
AUSTIN TX 78720
RADIAN CORP
8409 RSRCH BLVD
AUSTIN TX 78758
RECRA ENVIRONMENTAL
8320 GUILFORD RD BLDG E
COLUMBIA MD 21046
RECRA ENVIRONMENTAL
8320 GUILFORD RD BLDG E
COLUMBIA MD 21046
REGIONAL TRANSP. DISTRICT
1600 BLAKE ST.
DENVER CO 80202
REIDEL ENVIRONMENTAL SRVCS
16207 EDISON AVENUE
CHESTERFIELD MO 63305
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPFF FARMER
RESEARCH & DEV 65 GAGNON
EFF/EMISS.EVAL.4 CONTROL TECH. SURVEYS
LARGE BUS CPAF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 HALL
CONSUMER COMM. REGS. D EVE L.
LARGE BUS CPFF POLLARD
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 ANGELA HILKES
COMMIT FUNDS
LARGE BUS CPFF KIRBY
RESEARCH t DEV 65 DONALDSON
(D000309N1)
LARGE BUS CPFF MONTFORD
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 ANGELA HILKES
TECHNICAL SUPPORT - THERMAL TREATMENT
LARGE BUS CPFF SAVAGE/LH
RESEARCH & DEV 65 COUGHLIN
TECH. SUP. REGUL.DEV/ODW/HA
LARGE BUS FP SIMMONS
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
CHAM. ANALYTICAL SERVICES, ORGANICS
LARGE BUS FP LAU
SERVICES 65 CARASEA
EFF-DATE CONTRACT
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR
05/31/91 68D10031
09/30/92 D000893L1
& EVALS
07/10/90 68C00032
06/30/95 C00209WB1
07/20/89 68W90072
07/19/92 H800162E1
09/29/90 68D00125
09/30/92 D001924N1
07/06/89 68W90069
07/05/92 H800164E1
REGULATIONS
04/01/88 68C80008
09/30/92 CI87H774
09/28/90 68D00158
03/27/93 D000463R1
02/29/88 68W80051
06/09/99 W800933D1
CHEMICAL ANALYTICAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS
STA/LOCL OTHR FP VICKIE
01/15/92 68D20008
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 CHRISTOPHER MARTINEZ 12/31/92 D200104N1
ECO BUS PASSES FOR REGION 8 PERSONNEL
LARGE BUS CPAF EAVES
SERVICES 65 LARRY STAFFORD
EMERGENCY REMOVAL CONTRACT
02/04/91 68W10035
02/03/96 W900551C3
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
C 62F
AH91
X
C 28C
F202
X
C 31M
R510
X
C 53A
AH21
X
C 51A
R528
X
C 28C
F103
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
S 08A 08B
V212
X
C 72D
F108
X
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
2,117,473
05/31/94
5,397,090
5,350,292
06/30/95
26,965,797
3,848,150
07/20/92
16,806,110
3,338,978
09/30/93
6,650,000
2,479,729
07/05/92
7,395,325
3,912,287
09/30/92
6,068,214
916,575
03/27/93
2,772,000
321,546
08/30/90
770,100
81,125
12/31/92
81,125
21,502,745
02/03/96
0
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
25
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
RESEARCH ft EVALUATION ASSOC
109 CONNOR DR
SUITE 2101
CHAPEL HILL NC 37514
RESEARCH t EVALUATION ASSOC
100 EUTOPA DR
SUITE 590
CHAPEL HILL NC 37514
RESEARCH 4 EVALUATION ASSOC
100 EUTOPA DR
SUITE 590
CHAPEL HILL NC 2751
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
26
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
RESOURCE APPLICATIONS INC.
9291 OLD KEENE MILL ROAD
BURKE VA 22015
RESOURCE APPLICATIONS INC.
9291 OLD KEENE MILL ROAD
BURKE VA 22015
REVET ENVIRONMENTAL
365 PLANTATION ST.
WORCHESTER MA 01605
RIEDEL ENVIRON SERVICES, INC
P.O. BOX 3320
PORTLAND OR 97208
ROW SCIENCES INC
5515 SECURITY LANE
SUITE 500
ROCKVILLE MO 20852
ROY F WESTON
6021 LIVE OAK PKWY
NORCROSS GA 30093
ROY F WESTON INC
1426 WESTON WAY
WEST CHESTER PA 19380
ROY F WESTON INC
1426 WESTON WAY
WEST CHESTER PA 19380
ROY F WESTON INC
1426 WESTON WAY
WEST CHESTER PA 19380
ROY F WESTON INC
1426 WESTON WAY
WEST CHESTER PA 19380
ROY F WESTON INC
1426 WESTON WAY
WEST CHESTER PA 19380
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS CPFF KENNEDY
DATA PROCESSING 65 GREG HEIGEL
TAT 8(A)
SMALL BUS CPFF HILLIARD
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 JENNIFER MALONEY
TAT 8(A)
SMALL BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 KURD
CHEM. ANAL. SVCS. FOR ORGANICS (D000463R1)
LARGE BUS CPIF EAVES
SERVICES 65 HENSLEY
REGION VII DIOXIN EXCAVATION
SMALL BUS CPFF TANNER
SERVICES 65 CICMANEC
ANIMAL SUPPORT SERVICES/HER L/CI
LARGE BUS CPAF ERICKSON
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 THOMPSON
FUNDING FOR REGIONAL PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
LARGE BUS CPAF WENE
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 HAWKINS s f ft"t
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TEAM (TAT) ZONE 1
LARGE BUS CPAF ZENI
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 BARMAKEAN
PROG. MGMT. START UP FOR HESTON/REGION I
09/23/91
09/30/93
09/23/91
09/03/93
01/08/91
06/07/93
09/05/87
09/04/92
10/01/89
09/30/92
06/16/89
09/15/99
10/01/90
09/30/92
02/22/89
09/21/99
LARGE BUS CPAF KALWEI 02/10/89
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 PAUL SUMENSKI 01/31/99
FUNDING PROGRAM MGMT. FOR (ARCS) CONTRACT AWARD
LARGE BUS CPAF SPEARS CARTER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 JO ANNE LEBAW
PROGRAM MGMT. SUPPORT, RAY F WESTON INC
LARGE BUS CPAF AHLQUIST/CB
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ZOWNIR
RESPONSE ENG.ANALY CST/OERR/HA
04/28/89
04/30/99
09/02/87
09/30/92
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68H10023
W102244C3
68W10022
W000441C3
68D10013
D100277R1
68017462
WA87H536
68C90047
C90912RB1
68M90057
W902425D1
68W00036
W000031C1
68W90018
H900840D1
68W90015
H900618D2
68M90046
W901939D1
68033482
CI87R160
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBLGS
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM MAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
C
8711
D
C
8711
D
AS
F999
A
C
F099
X
C
R416
C
C
C214
X
C
C214
X
C
C214
X
C
C214
X
C
C214
X
C
F103
X
72D
75E
72F
7AM
61H
040
72D
DIP
06 L
10Q
72D
935,300
11/30/95
9,924,053
1,265,000
11/30/95
12,041,686
202,752
06/07/93
2,027,520
28,236,374
09/04/92
38,895,662
1,090,000
09/30/92
2,156,633
2,714,757
09/15/99
46,631,150
29,746,724
09/30/92
116,537,392
6,477,681
02/21/99
65,848,569
9,606,933
01/31/99
156,213,437
10,093,741
04/30/99
270,527,172
59,687,261
08/31/92
102,538,068
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
27
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
ROY F WESTON INC
1426 WESTON HAY
WEST CHESTER PA 19380
ROY F WESTON INC
1426 WESTON WAY
WEST CHESTER PA 19380
S COHEN t ASSOCIATES, INC
1311 DOLLY MADISON BLVD
MCLEAN VA 22102
S-CU3ED
PO BOX 1620
LA JOLLA CA 92038
S-CUBED
PO BOX 1620
LA JOLLA CA 92038
SAS INSTITUTE
1 SAS CIRCLE
CARY NC 27511
SCI APPLIC INC
*JRB ASSOC INC
8400 WESTPARK DR
MCLEAN VA 22102
SCI APPLIC INC
*JRB ASSOC INC
8400 WESTPARK DR
MCLEAN VA 22102
SCI APPLIC INC
*JRB ASSOC INC
8400 WESTPARK DR
MCLEAN VA 22102
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
8400 WESTPARK DR.
MCLEAN VA 22102
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPAF MANZKE
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 STEVE NATHAN
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES IN REGION
LARGE BUS CPAF BACHMANN
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 HACKER
INCREMENTAL FUNDING
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
06/01/88
05/31/98
V - WESTON
04/24/90
03/09/99
SMALL BUS CPAF HOUSER 11/03/89
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 KAHN 09/30/92
SUPP.FOR IONIZING ft NONIONIZING RADIATION PREGRAMS
LARGE BUS CPFF OPPERMAN 09/15/89
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 GUY SIMES 09/30/92
TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR RREL QA/QC PROGRAM
LARGE BUS CPFF OPPERMAN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 SIMS
RREL/QA/QC SUPPORT
LARGE BUS FP LOVERDE
DATA PROCESSING 65 MATHIS
SAS SOFTWARE
LARGE BUS CPAF BZDUSEK/SM
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 POLVI
HTR. ENFORCE. & PERMITS PROS.SUP/OWEP/WA
LARGE BUS CPAF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FORSHT
REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT
LARGE BUS CPFF HOUSER
RESEARCH & DEY 65 DONALDSON
(D000309N1)
LARGE BUS CPAF DOUGLAS
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 KENT ANDERSON
HAZ. WASTE DISPOSAL REGS ft GUIDANCE
05/25/90
09/30/93
09/30/89
09/30/97
09/30/88
09/30/92
01/01/91
09/30/92
09/27/90
09/30/92
06/29/90
12/31/92
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
6&W80089
W802999D1
68W90022
W982010F2
68D90170
D900367N1
68C90051
C90637RB1
68C00017
C90636RB1
68W90094
W 90 1454 A3
66C80066
C8W0422B1
68C10006
C000922T1
68D00122
D001787N1
68W00025
W901234E1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
C 72E
C214
X
C 02K
C129
X
C 33X
AH21
A
C 62C 32P
B504
X
C 62C
AZ11
X
S 54D
7030
X
C 230 23A 23G
F103 23D 23A
X
C 28C
AH31
X
C 53F 53B
AH21
X
C 31W 31T 31W
F999
X
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
13,688,985
05/31/98
222,184,330
3,894,034
03/09/99
46,153,898
19,164,044
09/30/92
20,554,775
389,060
09/30/92
1,241,300
443,000
09/30/93
1,221,524
775,756
09/30/97
14,890,454
28,567,595
09/30/93
81,279,015
1,587,945
09/30/94
8,107,238
1,076,978
09/30/93
5,645,296
7,501,658
06/30/94
19,753,433
(JU
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PASE
28
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
EFF-DATE CONTRACT C-CLASS
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM .
AREAS
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
8400 WESTPARK DR.
MCLEAN VA 22102
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
8400 WESTPARK DR.
MCLEAN VA 23102
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
8400 WESTPARK DR.
MCLEAN VA 22102
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
8400 WESTPARK DR.
MCLEAN VA 22102
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
8400 WESTPARK DR.
MCLEAN VA 22102
SCI APPLIC INTERNAT CORP.
1710 GOODRIDGE DR.
P.O. BOX 1303
MCLEAN VA 22102
SCI APPLICATIONS
10260 CAMPUS POINT DRIVE
SAN DIEGO CA 92121
SCIENTEX CORP.
1655 NORTH MYER DRIVE
SUITE 400
ARLINGTON VA 22209
SIERRA TECHNICAL SERVICES
4208 ARCATA HAY,
SUITE A
N. US VEGAS NV 89030
SIGMA RESEARCH CORP
234 LITTLETON RD
SUITE 2E
WESTFORD MA 01886
LARGE BUS CPAF SAVAGE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 STONE
TECH.ENG.4 SERV/HWERL/CI
LARGE BUS CPAF OPPERMAN
SERVICES 65 GANT
ON-SITE TECH.SUPPORT
LARGE BUS CPAF WISE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FRIETSOM
TECH.SUP.FOR SITE PROGRAM-SITE
10/19/88 68C80061 C
09/30/92 CaROOllBl F101
X
01/17/91 68C10005 C
09/30/95 C00904RB1 AH31
X
09/28/90 68C00048 C
09/26/95 C01853RB1 R421
X
LARGE BUS CPFF KELLY 12/05/88 68W90011 C
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 GAIL HANSEN 09/30/92 WA87K894 F999
TO FUND CONTRACT AFTER AWARD RFP NO.MA87-K894 X
LARGE BUS CPAF WISE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 STONE
TECH.ENG.t SERV.(MAC8R0011B1)RREL/CI
01/14/89 68C80062 C
09/30/92 C9R0043B1 R421
X
LARGE BUS CPFF TANNER 10/01/91 68C10068 C
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ANN HERN 09/30/92 C100083T1 R599
TECH SUPPORT FOR PRFL QUALITY ASSURANCE & SAFETY PROGRAM X
LARGE BUS CPAF KELLY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 NANCY, DECK
TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT ZONE IV
SMALL BUS CPFF HENE
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 JOHN CUNNINGHAM
01 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE TECH. SUPPORT
12/02/88 68W90008 C
12/02/93 W800002E1 R421
X
04/20/88 68W80080 S
04/19/92 W802480C2 F108
D
SMALL BUS CPFF CONNOLLY
SERVICES 65 KANTOR
TECHNICAL SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF
12/09/91
09/30/92
ENVIRN MONITORING
68C20101 C
C01215RB1 R498
C
SMALL BUS CPFF PRESNELL,
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ECKHOFF
2ND AWARD UNDER D801153N1
V.
09/12/89 68D90067
09/30/92 D901360N1
C
F101
62C
63P
62C
31C
62C
62C
81A 09K 08L
10G)
72D
60J
53D
9,906,970
09/30/92
47,144,379
4,547,832
09/30/95
37,200,541
12,920,014
09/28/95
29,106,130
4,059,613
09/30/92
6,217,101
12,718,228
09/30/92
9,417,272
141,700
09/30/96
2,549,719
30,166,267
12/02/93
29,314,270
904,375
04/19/92
1,180,173
19,343
09/30/95
0
414,573
09/30/92
454,627
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
FK/1
-------
04/08/93
VEND
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
SKINNER & SHERMAN LABS INC
300 SECOND AVE BOX 521
WALTHAM MA 02254
SKINNER & SHERMAN LABS INC
300 SECOND AVE BOX 521
WALTHAM MA 02254
SMITHFIELD POLICE MEPT.
215 PLEASANTVIEW AVE.
ESMOND RI 02971
SOBOTKA AND CO INC
2501 M ST NW SUITE 550
WASHINGTON DC 20037
SONOTECH, INC.
575 TRAVIS STREET, NH
ATLANTA GA 30318
SOUTHEASTERN CAPITOL CORP
625B CLYDE AVE
MOUNTAINVIEW CA 94043
SOUTHEASTERN CAPITOL CORP
3820 159TH AVE NE
REDMOND WA 98052
SOUTHEASTERN CAPITOL CORP
3820 6801 PRESS DR
NEW ORLEANS LA 70126
SOUTHEASTERN CAPITOL CORP
3820 6601 PRESS DR
NEW ORLEANS LA 70126
SOUTHWEST LABORATORY OF
OKLAHOMA, INC.
10926 EAST 55TH PLACE
TULSA OK 74146
SOUTHWEST RSRCH INST
8500 CULEBRA RO
P 0 BOX 28510
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 HURD
CHEM. ANAL. SVCS., INORGANICS LARGE BID LOT
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 HURD
CHEM. ANAL. SVCS. INORGANICS SM.BID LOT
STA/LOCL OTHR CR HUNT
SERVICES 65 HORAHAN
SITE SECURITY SERVICES AT DAVIS GSR
LARGE BUS CPFF MILLS
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 ZWERNEMAN.J
FINANCIAL TECH. PROCEDURAL ANALYSIS
SMALL BUS FP LLOYD
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 CAREY
SBIR-II
LARGE BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 BANKERT
D000463R1-ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP PRESNELL
SERVICES 65 HURD
D000463R1 - ORGANICS ANALYSIS
LARGE BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 HURD
CHEM ANAL SVCS FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
09/07/90
03/07/93
09/07/90
03/07/93
02/25/92
02/24/95
08/25/89
09/30/92
08/26/91
08/26/92
09/28/90
03/27/93
09/28/90
03/28/93
09/28/90
03/27/93
08/06/91
02/05/94
SMALL BUS FP BURNETT 03/23/92
BLANK/ILLEGAL 65 MIKE HURD 09/22/94
CHEMICAL ANALYTICAL SERVICES FOR INORGANICS
NON/PRFT RSCH FP BERND
SERVICES 65 HURD
CHEM ANAL SVCS FOR ORGANICS (D100455R1)
07/31/91
02/28/94
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
66000108
000046 2R1
68D00109
D000461R1
68S11001
H280322F1
68W90077
W802979A2
68D10101
D102198M1
68D00157
D001921R1
68D00152
D001863R1
68D00160
D001862R1
68D10097
D101871R1
68D20040
D200754R1
68D10088
D101902R1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72 F
F999
X
S 01P
S206
X
C 41M
R799
X
C 26T
AH11
C
AS 72F 727
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72F
F999
X
AS 72 F
F999
X
A 72F
8734
AS 72F
F999
X
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
761,049
03/07/93
1,679,040
780,870
03/07/93
1,679,040
65,340
65,340
5,003,525
08/24/92
9,601,050
149,942
08/26/92
149,942
436,798
03/27/93
4,367,980
717,036
03/28/93
1,805,760
598,297
03/27/93
4,419,360
202,488
02/05/94
202,488
89,496
09/22/94
894,960
2,168,100
02/28/94
10,406,880
M
SAN ANTONIO TX 76284
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/93
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
30
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TYPE
EFFORT
PROJECT
COST
PC
TITLE
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
C-CLASS
PROD/SRVC
SBAREA
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM
AREAS
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
SRA TECHNOLOGIES, INC
4700 KING ST. SUITE 300
ALEXANDRIA VA 22302
SUFFOLK COUNTY WATER
AUTHORITY
SUNRISE HWY & POND ROAD
OAKDALE NY 11769
SVERDRUP CORP
801 NORTH 11TH STREET
ST. LOUIS MO 63101
SYRACUSE UNIV RSRCH CORP
MERRILL LN
UNIV HEIGHTS
SYRACUSE NY 13210
SYRACUSE UNIV RSRCH CORP
MERRILL LN
UNIV HEIGHTS
SYRACUSE NY 13210
SYRACUSE UNIV RSRCH CORP
MERRILL LN
UNIV HEIGHTS
SYRACUSE NY 13210
TAMS CONSULTANTS INC
655 3RD AVE
NEW YORK NY 10017
TECHLAW, INC
14500 AVON PARKWAY
SUITE 300
CHANTILLY VA 22021
TECHNICAL RESOURCES INC
3202 TOWER OAKS BLVD
SUITE 200
ROCKVILLE MD 20852
SMALL BUS CPAF LLOYD 04/21/88
RESEARCH t DEV 65 EVERSON 09/30/92
SUPP.SERV.FOR ANAL.t BIOCHEM.EPIDEM.STUDIES
68080017 LS
DU87B235 AN11
D
STA/LOCL OTHR FP MURFHY
SERVICES 65 VOGELSANG,
SUFFOLK COUNTY HATER
LARGE BUS CPAF EAVES
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KAREN FLOURNOY
ARCS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM MGMT. FUNDING
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF OPPERMAN
SERVICES 65 POIRIER
ENV.HLTH.ASSESS.DOC.
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF FARMER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 HELM
TEST RULES SUPPORT SERVICES
NON/PRFT RSCH CPFF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 MCKEAN
HEALTH ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTS
LARGE BUS CPAF WEAVER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 ALVI
ARCS AWARD REGION II
SMALL BUS
SERVICES
NEIC-SUPPORT
CPAF
65
OSBORNE
PAULA SMITH
SMALL BUS CPAF LITTLEFIELD
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FRANK
TECH.SUP.SERVICES/CORV
08/01/90 68S02006 S
02/28/93 H082035F2 SI14
X
03/24/89 68W90032 C
03/31/99 W901523D1 C214
X
11/20/90 68C00043 C
09/30/92 C00929RB1 AH91
X
09/30/88 68D80117 C
09/30/92 D800368L1 F106
X
01/29/91 68C10004 C
09/30/92 C000933T1 AH31
X
02/01/89 68S92001 C
02/01/99 W982004F2 C214
X
11/16/89 68W00001 C
09/30/92 W901275A3 R421
A
04/27/90 66C00021 C
03/31/94 C90478RB1 R421
A
61H
2AK
07H
643
69A
643
02K
50H
63M
3,217,998
09/30/92
2,881,327
370,070
02/28/93
4,500,000
7,148,457
03/31/99
67,305,250
2,363,485
09/30/93
4,597,807
1,231,559
09/30/92
1,982,266
71,873
09/30/93
4,228,626
19,109,454
02/01/99
63,270,572
13,440,414
09/30/94
34,325,000
3,055,748
03/31/94
21,521,149
A
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
31
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TECHNICAL RESOURCES INC
3Z02 TOWER OAKS BLVD
SUITE 200
ROCKVILLE MD 20852
TECHNICAL RESOURCES INC
3202 TOWER OAKS BLVD
SUITE 200
ROCKVILLE MD 20852
TECHNOLOGY & MGMT. SERV.
20201 CENTURY BLVD.
GERMANTOWN MD 20874
TECHNOLOGY APPLICATION INC.
6101 STEVENSON AVE
ALEXANDRIA VA 22304
TECHNOLOGY APPLICATION INC.
6101 STEVENSON AVE
ALEXANDRIA VA 22304
TECHNOLOGY APPLICATION INC.
6101 STEVENSON AVE
ALEXANDRIA VA 22304
TECHNOLOGY APPLICATION INC.
6101 STEVENSON AVE
ALEXANDRIA VA 22304
TECHSOFT SYSTEMS INC.
1375 KEMPER MEADOW DR
CINCINNATI OH 45240
TELEMARC INC.
12015 LEE JACKSON HWY
SUITE 500
FAIRFAX VA 22033
TEMPLE, BARKER & SLOANE INC
33 HAYDEN
LEXINGTON MA 02173
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS CPFF HEANT
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 HUNG
GEN. RES. 4 DEV.SUPP.FOR OFFICE OF ENV.
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
04/18/91 68D10022
09/30/92 D000278L1
ENG.ft TECH. DEM.
SMALL BUS CPFF RICHARDS 09/30/90
SERVICES 65 KIRKLAND 04/30/95
MONIT.MOD.& ENV. PROCESSES & EFF. SUPPORT
SMALL BUS CPFF GRAY
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 JAMES T MCMASTER
MANAGEMENT SUPPORT FOT THE SUPERFUND
LARGE BUS CPAF OPPERMAN
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ROBERT F. THOMAS
ON-SITE ANALYSIS SUPPORT/RREL/CI
SMALL BUS CPAF BZDUSEK/CB
SERVICES 65 RATHBURN
TECH. SUP. MARINE DISCHG.ACTIV/ODH/HA
12/18/91
12/17/92
PROGRAM
12/26/89
09/30/94
12/26/89
09/30/94
68D00092
D001784M1
68H20005
H200433D1
68C00001
C90901RB1
68C80001
CI87H430
LARGE BUS CPAF OPPERMAN 05/09/91 68C10024
SERVICES 65 ROGER NEESMITH 09/30/95 C10002RT1
ON-SITE TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR US EPA IN ATHENS, GA
LARGE BUS CPAF CONNOLLY
SERVICES 65 THOMAS
ON-SITE TECHNICAL SUPPORT EMSL
SMALL BUS FP HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 REYNOLDS
ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
04/01/91
09/30/92
04/17/91
09/30/93
SMALL BUS TM STERN 09/30/91
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FRANCES HANAVAN 09/30/92
LOGISTICAL & DOCUMENT PREPARATION SUPPORT FOR OERR
68C10022
C001221T1
68C10023
C100653T1
68W10053
H100826D1
LARGE BUS CPFF CONNOLLY 09/29/90 68C00090
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 NIEHUS 09/30/93 C00908WB1
TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR EVALUATION * DEVELOPMENT
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBLGS
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM . MAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
C
F999
C
C
AH11
E
C
R799
C
C
B504
X
C
F103
A
C
AH91
X
C
R504
X
S
AH91
D
5
7389
D
C
, F103
X
62V 62F
265
72C
62C
87A
63K
60A
52E
72C
29A
1,793,443
09/30/93
2,707,505
385,009
04/30/95
1,777,085
948,514
12/17/95
8,729,585
1,793,927
09/30/94
11,925,123
3,575,798
09/30/94
5,775,342
1,636,429
09/30/95
16,833,253
2,211,116
03/31/96
16,007,547
108,048
09/30/93
555,248
50,000
09/30/94
1,560,848
822,315
09/30/93
2,062,425
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65;
PAGE
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TETRA TECH
630 N ROSEMEADE BLVD
PASADENA CA 91107
TETRA TECH CORP
10306 EATON PLACE SUITE 340
FAIRFAX VA 22030
TETRA TECH CORP
10306 EATON PLACE SUITE 340
FAIRFAX VA 22030
THE CADMUS GROUP INC
355 CONCORD AVE
BELMONT MA 02178
THE CADMUS GROUP INC
135 BEAVER STREET
WALTHAM MA 02154
THE CADMUS GROUP INC
135 BEAVER ST.
WALTHAM MA 02154
THORNE ENVIRONMENTAL INC.
4125 E. LAPALMA AV.
SUITE 300
ANAHEIM CA 92807
TICHENOR, RESLER * EICHE
SPROF. TOWERS, *310
4010 DUPORT CIRCLE
LOUISVILLE KY 40207
TILLMAN ASSOCIATES INC
RT 7 BOX 306
ADA OK 74820
TRC COMPANIES, INC
213 BURLINGTON RD
BEDFORD MA 01730
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS CPAF OZER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 FRANCIS BURNS
ARCS AWARD REGION III - TETRA TECH
LARGE BUS CPAF ENINGER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BROSSMAN
HATER QUAL. MONITORING/OHRS/WA
LARGE BUS CPFF RICHARDS
RESEARCH ft DEV 65 SCHAUM
TECH.SUPP.i RES. & DEV. FOR EXP. & RISK ,
SMALL BUS CPAF ENINGER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 COLEMAN
HTR.INFORC.t PERMITS. SUP/OWEP/HA
SMALL BUS CPFF LLOYD
RESEARCH & DEV 65 MESSER
TECH.SUPP.TO ATMOS.RES.t EXP. ASSESS. LAB
LARGE BUS CPFF TANNER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 LONG
TECHNICAL SUPPORT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF
LARGE BUS CPAF LOVE LADY
SERVICES 65 LONGSTON
FUNDING FOR THE ESTIMATED MGMT COSTS OF
SMALL BUS TM LUTZ
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 COIA
CPA AUDIT SERVICES
SMALL BUS CPFF CONNOLLY
SERVICES 65 PFEFFER
PEER REVIEW & ADMIN. SUPPORT FOR RSKERL
LARGE BUS CPAF KELLEY
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 KELLEY
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES
EFF-DATE CONTRACT
EXP-DATE RFP-NBR
06/23/88 68W80092
06/21/98 W803797D1
03/10/89 68C90013
02/28/93 C8W1240B1
09/30/90 68D00100
09/30/93 D900941M1
ASSESS.
03/01/89 68C90009
09/30/93 C8W0714B1
09/26/90 68D00095
09/30/92 D900955M1
04/13/90 68C00020
09/30/93 C90627WB1
THE UNDERGROUND
02/26/91 68W10012
02/28/96 W100905C3
THE ERCS ZONE 4B
05/26/89 68W90043
05/25/94 W902126A2
09/30/91 68C10046
09/30/92 C100676T1
, ADA
03/24/89 68W90033
03/23/99 W901510D1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
C 72E
C214
X
C 28B 286
R421
X
C 642
AH11
X
C 23D 23A
F103
C
C 60E
F999
C
C 40E
F202
X
C 72D
F108
X
C 35G
R704
A
C 63L
R498
A
C 01P
C214
X
CUM.OBLGS
MAX. EXP
MAX.POTVAL
13,666,517
06/21/98
65,342,544
12,857,238
02/28/93
11,524,438
302,500
09/30/93
302,500
11,160,055
09/30/93
30,428,403
1,353,173
09/30/93
3,297,568
3,557,132
09/30/93
13,848,240
1,106,105
02/28/96
59,681,813
319,098
05/25/94
14,607,000
121,386
09/30/93
344,043
6,641,116
03/23/99
63,111,026
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
FK/1
-------
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
33
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
TRC COMPANIES, INC
META TRACE, INC
13715 RIDER TRAIL NORTH
EARTH CITY MO 63045
URS COMPANY
155 BOVET RD
SAN MATED CA 94402
URS CONSULTANTS INC
5251 DTC PKWY, SUITE800
ENGLEWOOD CO 80111
VERSAR INC
*GEN TECHNOLOGIES DIV
6850 VERSAR CENTER
SPRINGFIELD VA 22151
VERSAR INC
*GEN TECHNOLOGIES DIV
6850 VERSAR CENTER
SPRINGFIELD VA 22151
VERSAR INC.
6850 VERSAR CENTER
SPRINGFIELD VA 22151
VERSAR INC.
6850 VERSAR CENTER
SPRINGFIELD VA 22151
VIAR & CO
112 SO PITT ST
ALEXANDRIA VA 22314
VIAR S CO
112 SO PITT ST
ALEXANDRIA VA 22314
VIAR i CO
112 SO PITT ST
ALEXANDRIA VA 22314
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER
PROJECT TITLE
LARGE BUS FP SIMMONS, J.L.
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ANGELO CARASEA
CHEM. ANALY. STUDIES - DIOXIN
LARGE BUS CPAF CARTER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 MARK SAMOLIS
URS CONSULTANTS
LARGE BUS CPAF CARTER-SPEARS
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 HANLEY
ARCS IN ZONE OF REGIONS VI, VII, VIII
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
08/13/87
08/13/92
06/09/89
06/30/99
05/26/89
06/30/99
LARGE BUS CPFF WEANT 09/27/89
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 KAHN 09/30/92
SUPPORT FOR REGULATORY DOCUMENT PRODUCTION
LARGE BUS CPAF RICHARDS 09/30/90
RESEARCH & DEV 65 SCHAUfl 09/30/95
TECH.SUPP.ft RES.& DEV FOR EXP & RISK ASSESS
SMALL BUS CPAF FARMER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 BRYANT
EXP. ASSESSMENTS FOR TOXIC SUBSTANCES
09/30/89
09/30/92
LARGE BUS CPFF DOHELL 06/30/89
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 ANGELA HILKES 06/30/92
HAZARDOUS HASTE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES-INORGANICS
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68017441
HA87J060
68W90054
W902475D2
68W90053
N902339D2
68D90095
D900184N1
68D00101
D001961M1
68D90166
D900526L1
68W90068
W800375E1
SMALL BUS TM LOVERDE 04/22/88 68W80083
DATA PROCESSING 65 TED HARRIS 09/30/92 HA87D075
ANALYSIS, FEASIBILITY STUDIES SYST DESIGNS & SYS EVAL
LARGE BUS CPAF SIMMONS, J.L.
SERVICES 65 WILTSHIRE, PAT
OPER.OF CONTRACT LAB -SMO OFFICE
09/19/89
09/18/94
SMALL BUS CPFF RICHARDS 09/30/90
SERVICES 65 HAEBERER S f~$iX) 09/30/93
TECH.SUPP.TO THE DIV. OF DATA QUAL. OBJECTIVES
68D90135
D900003R1
68D00083
D901733M1
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM
SBAREA AREAS
AA 72F
F999
X
C 09K
C214
X
C 08L
C214
X
C 33X
T013
X
C 72F 642
AH11
X
C 69E
F106
A
C 31H
R510
X
C 54D
R306
C
C 72F
F999
X
C 60U 72F
R415
A
CUM.OBLGS
MAX. EXP
MAX.POTVAL
9,405,864
08/13/92
9,405,864
11,685,177
06/30/99
288,760,199
15,742,707
06/30/99
157,811,577
272,950
09/30/92
370,115
1,137,361
09/30/95
1,242,161
7,115,176
09/30/92
9,887,035
5,059,735
06/30/92
14,484,766
22,495,359
03/30/93
33,075,185
65,976,387
09/18/94
143,801,171
294,100
09/30/93
1,110,716
fi (*•
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
II
04/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
PAGE
34
CONTRACTOR NAME
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS
VIAR & CO
112 SO PITT ST
ALEXANDRIA VA 22314
WASHINGTON DC 20041
VIAR & CO
112 SO PITT ST
ALEXANDRIA VA 22314
VIGYAN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
30 RESEARCH DR.
HAMPTON VA 23666
VIGYAN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
30 RESEARCH DR.
HAMPTON VA 23666
W. W. ENGINEERING
611 CASCADE WEST PKWY SE
GRAND RAPIDS MI 49506
WADE MILLER ASSOCIATES, INC.
1911 N. FT. MYER DR. »702
ARLINGTON VA 22209
WADSWORTH TESTING LABS
1600-4TH ST. , S.E.
CANTON OH 44701
WAN TECHNOLOGY
3342 INTERNATIONAL PARK DR
ATLANTA GA 30316
WARZYN ENGINEERING INC.
ONE SCIENCE COUNT
P.O. BOX 5385
MADISON WI 53705
WASTE MANAGEMENT INC
*CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
900 JORIE BLVD
TYPE COST NEGOTIATOR NAME EFF-DATE
EFFORT PC PROJECT OFFICER EXP-DATE
PROJECT TITLE
SMALL BUS CPFF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 LANDMAN
SCIENTIFIC t TECH. SUP. /OHRS/HA
LARGE BUS CPFF LAU
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 NANCY LIVINGSTONE
ADVISORY AND ANALYTICAL ASSISTANCE
SMALL BUS CPFF WEANT
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 DONALDSON
TECH. SUPP. FOR AIR. POLL. CONTROL PROGRAMS
SMALL BUS FP TRAIL
DATA PROCESSING 65 JOE LENTINI
GIS SUPPORT SERVICES
LARGE BUS CPAF CONNER
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 SUSAN HESTON
ORIGINAL FUNDING
SMALL BUS CPFF HENNESSEY
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 FOLSON
ECONOMIC/POLICY ANALYSIS
SMALL BUS FP BERND
SERVICES 65 MCCALLISTER
04/06/89
09/30/93
06/25/91
06/05/93
09/12/90
09/30/92
06/02/89
09/30/93
03/31/88
03/30/98
10/01/90
09/30/93
07/15/91
01/14/94
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
68C90019
C9W0006B1
68M10020
W001503D1
68D00018
D000812N1
68W90065
W900332A3
68H80079
W802440D1
68C00069
C00903WB1
680 10085
D101862R1
CHEM ANAL SERVICES FOR ORGANICS(D100455R1)
LARGE BUS FP BURNETT
SERVICES 65 FRIBUSH
01/20/89
07/19/92
68D90034
D900536R1
CHEMICAL ANAL. SERVICES FOR ORGANICS (W802036D1)
LARGE BUS CPFF BAMFORD
ARCHITECT/ENG 65 GUERRIERO
FIRST FUNDING FOR REMEDIAL PLANNING
LARGE BUS FP TRUDEAU
SERVICES 65 L. STAFFORD
T&D - REGION VII
07/08/87
03/31/98
09/30/90
09/29/94
68017401
HA87K245
68S07005
W090152F7
C-CLASS REPRESENTATIVE CUM.OBLGS
PROD/SRVC FUNDING PROGRAM MAX.EXP
SBAREA AREAS MAX.POTVAL
C
R421
A
C
R799
X
S
L099
D
S
D399
D
C
C214
X
C
R421
A
AS
F999
X
AS
F999
X
C
R219
X
A
F108
X
28C
72C
53D
55M
72E
40C
72F
72F
05F
7AM
23A 286 3,333,260
09/30/93
20,916,282
1,896,354
06/06/95
7,076,318
53C 75E , 212,614
09/30/93
-fi^ 1,228,553
2,402,081
09/30/93
4,932,887
5,246,589
03/30/98
58,347,645
1,199,000
09/30/93
7,601,032
436,427
01/14/94
1,911,360
1,769,680
07/19/92
2,112,000
1,144,000
03/31/98
2,664,570
480,000
09/30/94
1,200,000
OAK BROOK IL 60521
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
II
01/08/92
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CONTRACTS INFORMATION SYSTEM
VEND SORT ACTIVE CONTRACT LIST
PAGE
35
C-PC SPANS 65*65:
CONTRACTOR
CONTRACTOR
NAME
ADDRESS
TYPE
EFFORT
PROJECT TITLE
COST
PC
NEGOTIATOR NAME
PROJECT OFFICER
EFF-DATE
EXP-DATE
CONTRACT
RFP-NBR
C-CLASS
PROD/SRVC
SB ARE A
REPRESENTATIVE
FUNDING PROGRAM.
AREAS
CUM.OBLGS
MAX.EXP
MAX.POTVAL
WESTAT INC
1650 RESEARCH BLVD
ROCKVILLE MD 20850
WESTAT INCORPORATED
11600 NEBEL ST
ROCKVILLE MD 20852
WESTINGHOUSE HAZTECH INC
5260 PANOLA INDUSTRIAL BLVD
DECATUR GA 30035
WOODWARD CLYDE CONSULT INC
500 12TH ST SUITE 100
OAKLAND CA 94607
LARGE BUS CPFF HEARE
MANAGEMENT CONS 65 JOHN HARREN
STATISTICAL POLICY BRANCH SUPPORT
LARGE BUS CPFF HOUSER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 STERRETT
GEN.STAT.SUPP.FOR ASSESS.OF TOXIC SUBS.
LARGE BUS CPFF WALKER
SERVICES 65 BOTTS
EMERGENCY RESPONSE CLEANUP SERVICES
LARGE BUS CPFF ENINGER
TECHNICAL SRVC 65 LAPENSEE
TECH.SUP.NONPOINT CLN.LAKES/ODH/WA
06/11/91 68W10019 C 31R
09/30/92 H902966A2 R499
X
09/30/89 68D90174 C 69E
09/30/92 D901068L1 F106
X
08/17/91 68314004 C 04D 4AD
08/16/92 H186117F4 F108
X
08/09/88 68C80034 C 28E 23A
09/30/92 CI871128 F104
X
1>323,130
06/10/94
11,138,660
1,516,900
09/30/92
2,216,871
920,000
08/16/96
24,186,729
1,957,560
12/31/91
5,556,199
CIS DATA BASE AS OF 04/08/92
EK/1
-------
TOTAL NUMBER OF CONTRACTS:
348
TOTAL CUMULATIVE AMOUNT: 2,611,007,338
-------
ro rn ro rn ro ro
giaioi
m rn
oa
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro m ro m
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
ooooooaooo
aiiaiiooaa
gzzzzzzzzz
uaouooooo
immmrnrnnimrnrnrn
iaaaaoaoiao
ooo ooooooooogaooooooooi
COOJ 00 CO 00 CO 00 CO CO 00 CO CO CO 07 CO CO 00 CO CO 00 00 00 I
l_l-t_<_<_l_(_l_l_t_t_<_(_l_<_t_l_<_C_(_C_l_<_l_<_<_l_C_l_<_
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooc
i 09 CD 09 CO 00 09 CO CO CO CO 09 09 CO 09 00 09 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 09 CO 09 CO CD CD L
"3 O
v co
OO OOOOOOOOOOOl
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
mm ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro m ro ro ro ro ro ni ro ro ro ro ro m ro ro ro ro ro ro rti ro ro ro ro rn rn ro ro ro rn ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO
romrn rn ro m m m ro ro m ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro m ro ro ro
O O O O O O O O O O O O *"""
I TJ •
I O i
TOTOTO TO TO :
H-lH H H
i ro ro ro ro rn m rn ro ro ro ro ro rn ro ro ro ro ro ro i
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O i
^sOxQnTOXI'OsOTO'GfOXJ^O/O'QPDXl!
1 rn ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro m
iTjTjnp-pTjtjnntJTJ'O'^'P"^"*'
tOZQZQtQtQ'Q'QfQ'Q
l-HH-IH-HHHHH-(-iH
O O O
TQTOTQ
no oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooonooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
™")~H "H "H *H "H ~*4 *H "H "H *H ~H "H "H '"i "H "H ^ ^ ~H "H *H *H •H ~H ™H ~4 ™H *H "*4 "H *H ~H ~H ™"4 "^4 *H ~H ~*4 "H "H "H *H m^ "H ^H ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ "H "H "H *H "H ~^ *H •H
COCO CO CO CO CO 00 fJJ OJ CO 03 00 00 CO 00 00 t7 53 0) OJ CD 03 CO CO CO ^0 00 00 0 CO Co d 0 CO CD CO CO 00 00 (7 C3 CO CJ CO @ CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 09 CO 00 CO CO 00 CO @
WWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWW
WWW
WWW
WWW
WWW
WWW
w w w w
w w w w
w w
w w
w w
w w
wwwwwwwww
WWW
wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
W W W I
w w w
W W
•vl >1
W W W W I
•J VJ
I W W W
I -J •>)
WWW
w w w w
wwwwwwwwwwwww
WWW
Coco Co
333
ooo
coco oo
WWW
09 CO CO
W W W
Co 09 09
W W W
09 09 09
w w w w
09 09 CO 09
W W
00 Go
I w W
I 09 09
w w w w
CD CD CD CD
WWW
09 09 09
WWW
CO CO CO
WWW
09 09 O9
WWW
09 CD 09
w w w w
09 09 O9 09
3333333333333333333333333333333
OOO
Qo CD CD
O O O
O O O
Co 0> Co
o o o o
Oo CD Oo CD
o o
09 09
O O
133
o o
09 CO
TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ TJ
ro ro ro
ro ro ro
~t) -O
ro ro
333!
' ro ro ro ro
TJ TJ
TO TO
I TJ
I TO
O O O O
Co Co Oo Oo
>
TJ
TO
I3333
ooo
CO CO Co
J> > >
333
333333333333
OOO
Oo Oo Oo
333
ooo
CD 00 00
OOO
O9 O> 09
0000
09 CO 09 CO
13333333!
w w w w w w w w w w w w w
ooooooooooooo
09O9C009O0909090909C00909
•&.!>•>>>>>>>>>>>
'TO TO TO TO TO TO TO •^<-^J TO TO
I *Q *O
< ro ro
rorororororororororoporo
«O *6 *O
ro ro ro
•o -o -o
ro ro ro
rorororororororororororoi
• r- p-
i ->j ^l
r- r- r- r- r- i
r- r- i- r- t- r- r-
in en
xi a
lUIUIUIUIUIUIUIUIUIUIUIUIUItflUI
\TOTOTOTOTOTOTaTOTOTOTOTOTOTOTO
UlUIUIUlUIUIUIUlUIUIUIUIUI
UIUIUIUIUIUIUIUIUIUIUIUIUI
TO TO yO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO
333 333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
-HH-H -(HH-HHMHHHHHH-(-UI&(AU)UtUIUIUIUIUtVtUlUIU>UIUIU>U>UIUIUIU)IAUIUIU>V>U>U>t/IV>UIUIUIUItnuiUIUIUIUIUIUIUIVIUIUIUIU>UIU>
ooo ooooooonooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
zzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
ooo onooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
0)0) 03 tt 03 09 (S Q> CD 03 0s Oo 05 CD 00 OS 09 Co & Oo 00 Os Co 03 O> OJ 00 CD Oo 00 Q3 00 00 QO tt 00 CD 00 00 Co tt 00 OP Co 00 Oo 05 tt & O Oo Os tt 00 Oo Go Co Oo Os CD
OO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOC3OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
ooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
------- |