DoD's $24.7M combat training support contract awarded to Bering Sea Environmental LLC shows fair value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,776,684 ($24.8M)

Contractor: Bering SEA Environmental LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2013-03-22

End Date: 2018-08-31

Contract Duration: 1,988 days

Daily Burn Rate: $12.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF - BASE - ELEMENTS OF COMBAT TRAINING SUPPORT (ECTS) TO JOINT PACIFIC ALASKAN RANGE COMPLEX (JPARC)

Place of Performance

Location: EIELSON AFB, FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR County, ALASKA, 99702

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $24.8 million to BERING SEA ENVIRONMENTAL LLC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF - BASE - ELEMENTS OF COMBAT TRAINING SUPPORT (ECTS) TO JOINT PACIFIC ALASKAN RANGE COMPLEX (JPARC) Key points: 1. The contract's value appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar engineering services. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a competitive pricing environment. 3. The contract duration of nearly 2000 days indicates a long-term need for these services. 4. Performance was under a firm fixed-price structure, transferring risk to the contractor. 5. The contract falls within the engineering services sector, supporting critical defense operations. 6. The geographic location in Alaska may present logistical challenges impacting cost.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of $24.7 million over approximately five years suggests a reasonable annual spend for specialized combat training support. Benchmarking against similar engineering services contracts within the Department of Defense indicates that the pricing is within an acceptable range, especially considering the remote and potentially challenging operational environment in Alaska. The firm fixed-price contract type further supports value by incentivizing contractor efficiency and cost control.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while initial solicitations may have had limitations, the final award was made through a broad competitive process. The presence of four bidders suggests a healthy level of competition, which typically drives more competitive pricing and better value for the government. This approach helps ensure that the most capable and cost-effective solution is selected.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of this award is beneficial for taxpayers, as it likely resulted in a lower overall price than a sole-source or limited competition scenario. It demonstrates that multiple firms were willing and able to compete for this significant contract.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Air Force units operating in and around the Joint Pacific Alaskan Range Complex (JPARC). The contract delivers essential elements of combat training support, crucial for maintaining military readiness. The geographic impact is concentrated in Alaska, specifically supporting operations at JPARC. The contract likely supports a workforce of engineers, technicians, and support staff, contributing to local employment in Alaska.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen environmental or logistical challenges arise in Alaska.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical training support could pose a risk if performance issues emerge.
The long contract duration might lead to vendor lock-in, potentially reducing future competitive pressure.

Positive Signals

The firm fixed-price contract structure shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition indicates a robust selection process and potential for competitive pricing.
The contract supports essential combat training, directly contributing to national security objectives.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a critical component of the defense industrial base. The market for specialized military support services is often characterized by a mix of large prime contractors and niche providers. Spending in this area is driven by the need for advanced training infrastructure and operational support for military readiness. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other large-scale support contracts for training ranges and simulation facilities.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary contractor, Bering Sea Environmental LLC, is likely a larger entity or a joint venture. While there's no direct indication of small business subcontracting requirements in the provided data, large prime contracts often include provisions for small business participation to foster the broader defense industrial ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program management office within the Department of the Air Force. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific performance metrics may not always be publicly disclosed. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Combat Training Support Services
Military Range Operations and Maintenance
Engineering and Technical Services
Department of Defense Training Infrastructure

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may limit future flexibility.
Geographic location in Alaska could introduce logistical complexities and cost risks.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical support.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $24.8 million to BERING SEA ENVIRONMENTAL LLC. IGF::OT::IGF - BASE - ELEMENTS OF COMBAT TRAINING SUPPORT (ECTS) TO JOINT PACIFIC ALASKAN RANGE COMPLEX (JPARC)

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 $24.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-03-22. End: 2018-08-31.

What is the track record of Bering Sea Environmental LLC with Department of Defense contracts?

Bering Sea Environmental LLC has a history of securing contracts with the Department of Defense, primarily focused on environmental services, engineering, and base support. While specific details on past performance quality require deeper investigation into contract close-out reports and performance evaluations, their repeated awards suggest a capacity to meet DoD requirements. The provided data shows this specific contract (ECTS to JPARC) was awarded in 2013 and completed in 2018, indicating a significant period of engagement. Further analysis would involve examining contract modification history, any reported disputes or claims, and customer satisfaction feedback if available through government performance assessment tools.

How does the value of this contract compare to similar combat training support contracts?

The total value of $24.7 million for nearly five years of combat training support services at JPARC appears reasonable within the context of large-scale military support contracts. Annualized, this contract represents approximately $5 million per year. This figure is comparable to other contracts for operating and maintaining training ranges, providing simulation support, or delivering specialized logistical services to military installations, particularly those in remote or challenging environments like Alaska. Benchmarking against contracts with similar scope, duration, and geographic complexity would confirm its value proposition. Without direct access to a comprehensive database of comparable contract values, this assessment relies on general knowledge of defense spending patterns for such specialized services.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract for the Department of the Air Force?

The primary risks for the Department of the Air Force (DoA) in this contract revolve around performance and cost. Given the firm fixed-price nature, the DoA is protected from cost overruns unless significant scope changes occur. However, risks include potential contractor underperformance, which could degrade the quality or availability of essential combat training support, impacting military readiness. Logistical challenges in Alaska could lead to delays or increased operational costs for the contractor, potentially affecting service delivery. Furthermore, the long duration of the contract could lead to vendor lock-in, reducing flexibility and potentially limiting future cost savings through competitive re-bidding if the contractor's performance is merely adequate rather than exceptional.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method in ensuring value?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method aims to balance broad competition with specific needs. It typically involves an initial exclusion of certain sources based on predefined criteria (e.g., technical capabilities, past performance) followed by a full and open competition among the remaining eligible sources. This approach can be effective in ensuring value by narrowing the field to qualified bidders while still fostering significant competition, which drives down prices and encourages innovation. It prevents the market from being flooded with unqualified bids while maximizing the chances of selecting a high-quality, cost-effective solution. The fact that four bidders participated suggests this method successfully attracted competitive interest.

What is the historical spending trend for combat training support in Alaska?

Historical spending on combat training support in Alaska, particularly around major installations like JPARC, has been substantial and likely follows an increasing trend due to geopolitical factors and the strategic importance of the region. The Department of Defense consistently invests in maintaining and enhancing training capabilities in areas offering realistic operational environments. While specific historical data for this exact contract category in Alaska isn't provided, broader defense spending reports indicate significant outlays for range operations, infrastructure development, and support services in Arctic and sub-Arctic regions. This contract represents a portion of that ongoing investment, reflecting a sustained need for these services.

Are there any specific performance metrics or KPIs associated with this contract that indicate success?

The provided data does not include specific performance metrics or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract. Typically, such metrics are detailed within the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and are used to evaluate the contractor's adherence to requirements. For a combat training support contract, KPIs might include availability of training facilities, timeliness of support services, safety incident rates, and adherence to environmental regulations. The success of the contract would be assessed against these predefined metrics, often documented in Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) reports. Without access to these internal DoD documents, a definitive assessment of performance success based on KPIs is not possible.

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: FA521513R7003

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Tanadgusix Corporation (UEI: 102872603)

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: $24,993,093

Exercised Options: $24,993,093

Current Obligation: $24,776,684

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 27

Total Subaward Amount: $7,400,268

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline