DoD's $66.3M engineering services contract with Bering Sea Environmental LLC shows fair value despite limited competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $66,257,530 ($66.3M)
Contractor: Bering SEA Environmental LLC
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2016-01-29
End Date: 2023-06-30
Contract Duration: 2,709 days
Daily Burn Rate: $24.5K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF AWARD COST REIMBURSABLE ITEMS
Place of Performance
Location: MOUNTAIN HOME AFB, ELMORE County, IDAHO, 83648
State: Idaho Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $66.3 million to BERING SEA ENVIRONMENTAL LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF AWARD COST REIMBURSABLE ITEMS Key points: 1. Contract awarded to Bering Sea Environmental LLC for engineering services. 2. The contract value is approximately $66.3 million. 3. Awarded by the Department of the Air Force. 4. Contract type is a definitive contract with firm-fixed-price task orders. 5. The contract duration is over 2700 days. 6. Competition was full and open after exclusion of sources. 7. The contract was awarded in January 2016 and ends in June 2023.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific service details. However, the firm-fixed-price nature of the task orders suggests a degree of cost control. The contract's long duration implies a sustained need for these engineering services. Compared to similar large-scale engineering support contracts, the overall value appears within a reasonable range, though a detailed cost-benefit analysis would be needed for a definitive assessment.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources.' This indicates that while the initial solicitation might have had some restrictions, the final award was made after a broad competitive process. The presence of two bidders suggests a moderate level of competition, which is generally positive for price discovery.
Taxpayer Impact: A competitive process, even with two bidders, helps ensure that taxpayer funds are used efficiently by driving down prices and encouraging innovative solutions.
Public Impact
The Department of the Air Force benefits from specialized engineering expertise. Services likely support critical infrastructure or operational needs. The contract's geographic impact is centered around the agency's operations. Workforce implications include employment for engineers and support staff.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Limited number of bidders (2) may indicate potential barriers to entry for other firms.
- Long contract duration could lead to scope creep or evolving requirements not fully captured in initial pricing.
- The 'after exclusion of sources' clause warrants further investigation into initial restrictions.
Positive Signals
- Firm-fixed-price task orders provide cost certainty for the government.
- The contract was awarded through a competitive process, suggesting a degree of market validation.
- The sustained need for these services indicates a valuable and ongoing requirement.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, a critical component of the broader professional services market supporting government operations. The market for specialized engineering services is competitive, with numerous firms capable of undertaking complex projects. This specific contract's value of approximately $66.3 million places it as a significant award, likely supporting substantial defense-related engineering initiatives. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend on the specific engineering discipline and scope.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, small businesses are unlikely to be direct prime contractors. However, there may be opportunities for small businesses to participate as subcontractors, depending on the prime contractor's subcontracting plan and the nature of the engineering services required.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Air Force contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules tied to deliverables. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance metrics may not be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- Defense Engineering Services
- Professional Services Contracts
- Air Force Procurement
- Long-Term Service Contracts
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration may increase risk of scope creep and cost overruns.
- Limited number of bidders (2) could indicate potential market concentration or barriers to entry.
- The 'after exclusion of sources' clause warrants review to ensure fairness and broad competition.
Tags
engineering-services, department-of-defense, department-of-the-air-force, definitive-contract, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, idaho, professional-services, large-contract, long-duration-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $66.3 million to BERING SEA ENVIRONMENTAL LLC. IGF::OT::IGF AWARD COST REIMBURSABLE ITEMS
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is BERING SEA ENVIRONMENTAL LLC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $66.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2016-01-29. End: 2023-06-30.
What specific engineering services were provided under this contract?
The provided data identifies the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code as 541330, which corresponds to 'Engineering Services.' However, the specific nature of these services is not detailed. This could range from design and development, systems engineering, technical support, environmental engineering, or specialized consulting. Without further information on the Statement of Work (SOW) or task orders, it's impossible to ascertain the precise services rendered. Understanding the exact services is crucial for a comprehensive value assessment and comparison to market rates.
How does the $66.3 million contract value compare to similar engineering services contracts awarded by the DoD?
Comparing the $66.3 million contract value requires context regarding the scope, duration, and specific services. The Department of Defense procures a vast array of engineering services, from large-scale system design to specialized technical support. Contracts of this magnitude are not uncommon for major defense programs or long-term infrastructure projects. However, without knowing the specific engineering discipline (e.g., aerospace, civil, electrical) and the complexity of the tasks, a direct comparison is difficult. Generally, for long-term, comprehensive engineering support, this value appears within a plausible range, but a detailed benchmark against contracts with identical SOWs would be necessary for a precise assessment of value for money.
What are the potential risks associated with a definitive contract of this duration (over 2700 days)?
Definitive contracts with durations exceeding 2700 days (over 7 years) carry several potential risks. Firstly, scope creep is a significant concern; as requirements evolve over such a long period, the initial scope may become outdated, leading to contract modifications and potential cost overruns if not managed carefully. Secondly, technological obsolescence can occur, especially in rapidly advancing fields, making the services or solutions provided less relevant or efficient. Thirdly, contractor performance can degrade over time, or key personnel may leave, impacting service quality. Finally, market conditions and pricing can change substantially, potentially making the original pricing less competitive over the contract's life. Robust oversight and change management are critical to mitigate these risks.
What does 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' imply for the procurement process?
The term 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' suggests a two-stage procurement process. Initially, the solicitation may have included specific criteria or restrictions that excluded certain potential offerors (e.g., requiring specific certifications, past performance in a niche area, or geographic limitations). However, after this initial exclusion phase, the remaining solicitation was conducted under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources meeting the revised criteria were allowed to compete. This approach is sometimes used when a specific capability is needed, but the government wants to ensure the broadest possible competition among qualified entities. It aims to balance the need for specialized capabilities with the benefits of competitive pricing.
How has spending on engineering services by the Department of the Air Force trended historically?
Analyzing historical spending trends for engineering services by the Department of the Air Force requires access to comprehensive procurement data over multiple fiscal years. While this specific contract award date (2016) provides a snapshot, understanding broader trends would involve examining annual spending reports, contract databases (like FPDS), and agency budget justifications. Generally, the Air Force, like other branches of the DoD, relies heavily on engineering services for aircraft development, maintenance, infrastructure projects, and advanced technology research. Spending in this category can fluctuate based on major acquisition programs, modernization efforts, and geopolitical requirements. A detailed analysis would likely show significant and consistent investment in engineering support, potentially increasing during periods of major technological advancement or force structure changes.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: FA489015R0001
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Tanadgusix Corporation
Address: 615 E 82ND AVE STE 200, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99518
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, American Indian Owned Business, Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $68,354,277
Exercised Options: $68,326,965
Current Obligation: $66,257,530
Actual Outlays: $9,584,609
Subaward Activity
Number of Subawards: 7
Total Subaward Amount: $17,975,398
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2016-01-29
Current End Date: 2023-06-30
Potential End Date: 2023-06-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2024-09-06
More Contracts from Bering SEA Environmental LLC
- Requirement IS for Acts O&M Support Services AT Eglin, Langley, Seymour Johnson, Shaw, Barksdale and Mountain Home Afbs, AS Well AS Oconus Funded Sites AT Lakenheath, Spangdahlem, and Aviano ABS. the Work Under Acts Includes ALL Maintenance and Repairs on Acts Pods and Debriefing Stations, Transports and Loading of Pods Onto the Aircrafts and Preparing Data Cartridges Both Before and After Missions. the Acts Requirement Also Calls for Addition of Additional Sites From Majcoms And/Or AIR National Guard Sites During the 5-Year Performance Period — $57.2M (Department of Defense)
- Crtc Support Services — $26.2M (Department of Defense)
- - Base - Elements of Combat Training Support (ects) to Joint Pacific Alaskan Range Complex (jparc) — $24.8M (Department of Defense)
- Misawa/Osan/Kunsan/Kadena Instrumentation Training System (mokkits) Operations Support — $9.2M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)