GSA awards $1.28M environmental services contract to Oneida Total Integrated Enterprises LLC for Joint Base Charleston and Shaw AFB

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $1,279,001 ($1.3M)

Contractor: Oneida Total Integrated Enterprises LLC

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2025-04-04

End Date: 2026-04-03

Contract Duration: 364 days

Daily Burn Rate: $3.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FENCE-TO-FENCE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AT JOINT BASE CHARLESTON AND SHAW AFB, SOUTH CAROLINA

Place of Performance

Location: CHARLESTON, CHARLESTON County, SOUTH CAROLINA, 29401

State: South Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $1.3 million to ONEIDA TOTAL INTEGRATED ENTERPRISES LLC for work described as: FENCE-TO-FENCE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AT JOINT BASE CHARLESTON AND SHAW AFB, SOUTH CAROLINA Key points: 1. Contract value of $1.28M for environmental services represents a moderate investment in base infrastructure. 2. Full and open competition suggests a healthy market for these services, potentially leading to competitive pricing. 3. The fixed-price contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor, incentivizing efficient service delivery. 4. A duration of one year with a potential for extension indicates a need for ongoing environmental management. 5. The contract's focus on remediation services addresses critical environmental compliance and safety requirements at military installations.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $1.28M for environmental services appears reasonable for a one-year duration covering two major Air Force bases. Benchmarking against similar large-scale environmental remediation contracts would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure is generally favorable for the government when scope is well-defined, as it caps costs and incentivizes contractor efficiency. Without specific details on the scope of work, a direct comparison of unit costs is difficult, but the overall award seems aligned with typical federal spending for such services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple qualified vendors were able to bid. The presence of four bidders (no) suggests a competitive environment for environmental services. This level of competition is generally positive as it allows the government to solicit proposals from a wide range of capable contractors, fostering price discovery and potentially leading to more favorable terms and pricing for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition process is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of securing services at a competitive market rate, preventing potential overpayment and ensuring that government funds are used efficiently.

Public Impact

Military personnel and civilian employees at Joint Base Charleston and Shaw Air Force Base benefit from a safe and compliant environmental operating space. Essential environmental remediation services are delivered, addressing potential contamination and ensuring regulatory adherence. The geographic impact is concentrated in South Carolina, supporting the operational readiness of key military installations. The contract supports jobs within the environmental services sector, potentially including specialized technical and labor roles.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if initial environmental assessments are incomplete, leading to cost overruns despite fixed-price structure.
Dependence on contractor's technical expertise and adherence to environmental regulations requires diligent oversight.
Geographic spread across two bases may introduce logistical complexities for the contractor, potentially impacting timelines or costs.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a robust market and potential for competitive pricing.
Contractor's selection implies they met technical and performance requirements for environmental remediation.

Sector Analysis

The environmental services sector is a critical component of government operations, particularly for military installations requiring ongoing compliance with stringent environmental regulations. This contract falls within the broader environmental consulting and remediation services market, which is characterized by specialized expertise and a mix of large and small businesses. Federal spending in this area is substantial, driven by the need to manage hazardous materials, clean up contaminated sites, and ensure sustainable practices across numerous government facilities. The award to Oneida Total Integrated Enterprises LLC, a company with a presence in this sector, aligns with the government's strategy to procure these essential services.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a result, large businesses or those capable of competing on a larger scale were the primary participants. While there is no direct small business set-aside, the prime contractor may engage small businesses as subcontractors to fulfill specific aspects of the contract, contributing to the broader small business ecosystem. However, the absence of a set-aside means direct opportunities for small businesses to secure the prime contract were limited in this instance.

Oversight & Accountability

The General Services Administration (GSA) typically employs robust oversight mechanisms for its contracts. This includes performance monitoring, contract close-out procedures, and adherence to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) guidelines. The firm-fixed-price nature of the award places a significant portion of the performance accountability on the contractor. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General oversight may be involved if specific performance issues or allegations of fraud arise.

Related Government Programs

Environmental Remediation Services
Base Operations Support
Military Construction and Facilities Management
Hazardous Waste Management

Risk Flags

Potential for unforeseen environmental conditions impacting scope and cost.
Contractor performance risk requires diligent oversight.
Geographic distribution across two bases may add complexity.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $1.3 million to ONEIDA TOTAL INTEGRATED ENTERPRISES LLC. FENCE-TO-FENCE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AT JOINT BASE CHARLESTON AND SHAW AFB, SOUTH CAROLINA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ONEIDA TOTAL INTEGRATED ENTERPRISES LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Federal Acquisition Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $1.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-04-04. End: 2026-04-03.

What is the track record of Oneida Total Integrated Enterprises LLC in performing similar environmental remediation contracts for the federal government?

Assessing the track record of Oneida Total Integrated Enterprises LLC requires a review of their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those involving environmental remediation services. Data from contract databases like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) can reveal their award history, contract values, and agencies served. Performance evaluations, if publicly available, would offer insights into their timeliness, quality of work, and adherence to contract requirements. A history of successful completion of similar projects, especially at large military installations, would indicate a lower risk for this current contract. Conversely, a pattern of performance issues, disputes, or contract terminations would raise concerns about their capability to deliver effectively on this $1.28M award.

How does the awarded price of $1.28M compare to the estimated cost or market rates for similar environmental services at other military bases?

To benchmark the $1.28M award, one would compare it against the estimated cost provided by the government during the solicitation phase, if available, or against historical data for similar contracts. Analyzing the scope of work (e.g., types of contaminants, area of remediation, duration) is crucial for a fair comparison. For instance, if similar contracts for remediation at bases of comparable size and complexity in the same region or with similar environmental challenges were awarded in the range of $1M to $1.5M, then this award would appear to be within market norms. If comparable contracts were significantly lower, it might suggest this award is on the higher side, warranting further investigation into the specific requirements or contractor's proposed costs. Conversely, if it's substantially lower than benchmarks, it could indicate aggressive pricing or potentially underestimated scope.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm-fixed-price contract for environmental remediation services?

The primary risks associated with this firm-fixed-price contract center on potential scope creep and the contractor's ability to manage unforeseen environmental conditions. While the fixed-price structure protects the government from cost overruns due to contractor inefficiency, it does not shield against increases if the scope of work expands beyond what was initially defined. For environmental remediation, unforeseen contamination or complex geological factors could necessitate additional work, potentially leading to change orders or disputes if not managed carefully. Another risk is the contractor's technical capability; if they lack the expertise or resources to handle specific remediation challenges effectively, it could lead to delays, incomplete work, or environmental compliance issues, impacting base operations and potentially requiring government intervention or re-procurement.

What is the expected effectiveness of the environmental services to be provided under this contract in ensuring compliance and safety at the bases?

The effectiveness of the environmental services hinges on the contractor's adherence to the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) and applicable environmental regulations (e.g., EPA standards, RCRA, CERCLA). The contract's objective is to ensure Joint Base Charleston and Shaw AFB maintain environmental compliance, mitigate risks from hazardous materials or contamination, and support overall base safety and operational readiness. Success will be measured by the contractor's ability to complete remediation tasks within the specified timelines and to the required quality standards, as documented through performance reports and potentially environmental monitoring data. Effective service delivery should result in reduced environmental liabilities, improved air and water quality, and a safer environment for base personnel and surrounding communities.

How does the historical spending on environmental services at Joint Base Charleston and Shaw AFB compare to this new award?

Analyzing historical spending on environmental services at Joint Base Charleston and Shaw AFB is crucial for context. This involves examining past contracts awarded for similar services at these installations over several fiscal years. If previous annual spending averaged around $1M-$1.5M for comparable services, then this $1.28M award appears consistent with historical patterns. However, if historical spending was significantly lower or higher, it might indicate a change in environmental conditions, regulatory requirements, or the scope of services needed. Understanding these trends helps determine if the current award represents an increase, decrease, or stable level of investment in environmental management for these bases, and whether it aligns with long-term environmental stewardship goals.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Remediation and Other Waste Management Services › Remediation Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: 47QFWA25Q0003

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1033 N MAYFAIR RD STE 200, MILWAUKEE, WI, 53226

Business Categories: American Indian Owned Business, Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Tribally Owned Firm, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $3,361,807

Exercised Options: $1,316,482

Current Obligation: $1,279,001

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47QFWA24A0002

IDV Type: BPA

Timeline