EPA awards $1.5M IT support contract to Chenega Services & Federal Solutions for radiation field operations

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $1,523,530 ($1.5M)

Contractor: Chenega Services & Federal Solutions, LLC

Awarding Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Start Date: 2024-06-01

End Date: 2026-05-31

Contract Duration: 729 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: IT

Official Description: IT SUPPORT SERVICES INCLUDING ON-SITE EMERGENCY RESPONSE (ER) INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF THE EPA'S NATIONAL CENTER FOR RADIATION FIELD OPERATIONS (NCRFO) ANALYTICAL NETWORK, LOCAL/CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE, AND ER FIELD COMMUN

Place of Performance

Location: LAS VEGAS, CLARK County, NEVADA, 89119

State: Nevada Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Environmental Protection Agency obligated $1.5 million to CHENEGA SERVICES & FEDERAL SOLUTIONS, LLC for work described as: IT SUPPORT SERVICES INCLUDING ON-SITE EMERGENCY RESPONSE (ER) INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF THE EPA'S NATIONAL CENTER FOR RADIATION FIELD OPERATIONS (NCRFO) ANALYTICAL NETWORK, LOCAL/CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE, AND ER FIELD COMMUN Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical IT infrastructure and emergency response for the EPA's National Center for Radiation Field Operations. 2. The award is a definitive contract with a firm fixed price, indicating a clear scope and cost structure. 3. The duration of the contract is 729 days, spanning approximately two years. 4. The contract was not competitively procured, raising questions about potential value for money. 5. The primary service area is Nevada, suggesting a localized but essential support function. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541512 points to computer systems design services.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $1.52 million for two years of IT support services appears reasonable for specialized technical support, especially considering the inclusion of on-site emergency response. However, without a competitive bidding process, it is difficult to benchmark the pricing against market rates or identify potential cost savings. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government, but the absence of competition limits the ability to assess if this represents the best possible value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded using a sole-source justification, meaning it was not open to full and open competition. This approach is typically used when only one responsible source can provide the required services. The lack of competition means that multiple bidders were not considered, which can limit price discovery and potentially lead to higher costs for the government compared to a fully competed contract.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not be receiving the most competitive pricing due to the absence of a bidding process. The government's ability to negotiate the best possible price is diminished when only one vendor is considered.

Public Impact

The EPA's National Center for Radiation Field Operations (NCRFO) will benefit from enhanced IT support, ensuring operational continuity. Essential IT services, including local/cloud infrastructure and emergency response, will be maintained. The contract's geographic impact is focused on Nevada, supporting field operations in that region. The contract supports specialized IT roles, potentially impacting the workforce in computer systems design and support.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition may result in suboptimal pricing.
Sole-source awards require strong justification to ensure necessity and fairness.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical IT infrastructure poses a risk.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Contract duration of two years allows for stable support.
Specialized IT support for a critical national function (radiation field operations).

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the IT support services sector, specifically computer systems design and related services. The market for such services is robust, with numerous providers capable of offering IT infrastructure management, cloud services, and emergency response capabilities. The EPA's need for specialized support for its radiation field operations indicates a niche within the broader IT services market, where technical expertise and reliability are paramount. Benchmarking would typically involve comparing pricing for similar managed IT services contracts with emergency response components.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not awarded to a small business (ss: false) and does not appear to have small business set-aside provisions (sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from this specific award. The focus is on a large business prime contractor, Chenega Services & Federal Solutions, LLC, which may have its own small business subcontracting goals on other contracts but not as a direct requirement of this particular award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Environmental Protection Agency's contracting officers and program managers responsible for the National Center for Radiation Field Operations. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, requiring the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed budget. While no specific Inspector General jurisdiction is mentioned, the EPA's Office of Inspector General typically oversees agency spending for waste, fraud, and abuse.

Related Government Programs

EPA IT Modernization Contracts
National Environmental Monitoring Programs
Federal Emergency Response IT Support
Computer Systems Design Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
Potential for cost overruns if scope is not tightly managed.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical infrastructure.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Environmental Protection Agency awarded $1.5 million to CHENEGA SERVICES & FEDERAL SOLUTIONS, LLC. IT SUPPORT SERVICES INCLUDING ON-SITE EMERGENCY RESPONSE (ER) INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF THE EPA'S NATIONAL CENTER FOR RADIATION FIELD OPERATIONS (NCRFO) ANALYTICAL NETWORK, LOCAL/CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE, AND ER FIELD COMMUN

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CHENEGA SERVICES & FEDERAL SOLUTIONS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Environmental Protection Agency (Environmental Protection Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $1.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-06-01. End: 2026-05-31.

What is Chenega Services & Federal Solutions, LLC's track record with the EPA and similar government agencies?

Chenega Services & Federal Solutions, LLC is a significant government contractor with a history of awards across various agencies, including the EPA. Their portfolio often includes IT services, facilities management, and base operations support. A review of their past performance with the EPA and other federal entities would reveal their experience in delivering similar IT support, emergency response, and infrastructure management services. Analyzing past contract performance, including any reported issues, successful deliveries, and client satisfaction, is crucial for assessing their capability to meet the requirements of this specific contract. Their broader government contracting history suggests they possess the capacity to handle complex IT operations.

How does the $1.52 million contract value compare to similar IT support contracts for specialized federal operations?

Benchmarking this $1.52 million contract value requires comparing it to similar IT support contracts that include specialized services like on-site emergency response for critical infrastructure. Contracts for managing IT networks, cloud infrastructure, and providing immediate technical support in sensitive operational environments (like radiation field operations) can vary significantly based on scope, duration, geographic location, and required security clearances. Without access to a comprehensive database of comparable sole-source awards or detailed market research conducted by the EPA, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the value appears to be within a plausible range for a two-year, firm-fixed-price contract supporting a niche federal operation, assuming the scope of services is adequately defined and the contractor's proposed costs are reasonable for the expertise required.

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for critical IT support services?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for critical IT support services include potential overpricing due to lack of competition, reduced incentive for the contractor to innovate or provide exceptional service, and a lack of market validation for the chosen solution. Taxpayers may bear a higher cost than if the contract had been competed. Furthermore, reliance on a single vendor for essential services can create vulnerabilities if the contractor experiences financial instability, operational failures, or decides to exit the market. The government's leverage in negotiations is also diminished. Robust oversight and clear performance metrics are essential to mitigate these risks.

How effective is the firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type in managing costs for IT support services?

The Firm Fixed-Price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective for managing costs when the scope of work is well-defined and unlikely to change significantly. For IT support services like those required by the EPA's NCRFO, FFP provides cost certainty for the government, as the contractor assumes the risk of cost overruns. This structure incentivizes the contractor to control costs and perform efficiently to maximize profit. However, if the scope of work is not precisely defined or unforeseen technical challenges arise, the contractor may be less willing to accommodate changes without additional cost, potentially leading to disputes or a need for contract modifications. For stable, predictable IT support, FFP is often a preferred choice for cost control.

What is the historical spending pattern for IT support services at the EPA's National Center for Radiation Field Operations?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for IT support services at the EPA's National Center for Radiation Field Operations (NCRFO) is crucial for understanding the context of this $1.52 million award. This would involve examining previous contracts awarded to support the NCRFO's IT infrastructure, including the types of services procured, the duration and value of those contracts, and the contractors involved. Understanding whether previous support was also sole-sourced or competitively procured, and how spending has trended over time, can reveal patterns of increasing costs, changes in service requirements, or consistent reliance on specific vendors. This historical data provides a baseline against which the current award's value and necessity can be more effectively assessed.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Computer Systems Design Services

Product/Service Code: IT AND TELECOM - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS › IT AND TELECOM - COMPUTE

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: 68HERD24R0003

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 609 INDEPENDENCE PARKWAY, CHESAPEAKE, VA, 23320

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, 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: $7,300,202

Exercised Options: $1,523,530

Current Obligation: $1,523,530

Actual Outlays: $1,234,224

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline