Federal contractor · NEWBURGH, IN

ENERGY SYSTEMS GROUP, LLC

ENERGY SYSTEMS GROUP, LLC received $44M in federal contract obligations in FY2026, on 16 awards (−31% vs FY2025). Since FY2017: $497M. Its largest customer was Department of the Army ($23.3M).

Obligations · FY2026
$44M
New awards
16
Sole-source
39%
Single offer
22%
UEI
JBZELFBMX1J4
Other than small business
Open in the contracts explorerRelationship graph

Spending by fiscal year

Obligations per federal fiscal year (October–September).

  1. 32.2MFY2017
  2. 54MFY2018
  3. 40.8MFY2019
  4. 52.8MFY2020
  5. 58.3MFY2021
  6. 53.8MFY2022
  7. 48.6MFY2023
  8. 48.8MFY2024
  9. 63.6MFY2025
  10. 44MFY2026

Top buying agencies

Obligations in FY2026.

  1. Department of the Army$23.3M53%
    7 awards
  2. National Aeronautics and Space Administration$7M16%
    1 awards
  3. Department of the Navy$6.3M14%
    3 awards
  4. Defense Logistics Agency$4.3M9.9%
    2 awards
  5. Environmental Protection Agency$2.4M5.4%
    1 awards
  6. Department of Veterans Affairs$416.4K0.9%
    1 awards
  7. Public Buildings Service$297.2K0.7%
    1 awards

What was bought · Where the work was performed

Obligations in FY2026.

What was bought

  1. Professional services$18.5M42%
  2. Construction & real property$12M27%
  3. Research & development$11.9M27%
  4. Equipment maintenance$1.6M3.7%

Where the work was performed

  1. Morris County, NJ$17.2M39%
  2. Warrick County, IN$7M16%
  3. Cumberland County, NC$3.6M8.1%
  4. Davis County, UT$3.4M7.8%
  5. Dougherty County, GA$3.4M7.7%
  6. St. Clair County, MI$2.5M5.8%
  7. Durham County, NC$2.4M5.4%
  8. San Diego County, CA$1.9M4.4%
  9. San Bernardino County, CA$1M2.3%
  10. Hampton city, VA$922.5K2.1%

Integrity signals

Shares of the year's obligations, next to the country's.

  • Low competition61%
    US 39% · $27M
  • Sole-source awards39%
    US 30% · $17.2M
  • Single-offer competitions22%
    US 8.7% · $9.8M
  • Urgency justifications0.0%
    US 5.1% · $0

A signal is a reason to look closer, not evidence of wrongdoing: most sole-source awards are lawful and justified.

Agencies awarding it sole-source contracts

  1. Department of the Army$17.2M
    Department of Defense · 1 awards

Largest awards

  1. ESPC AT NAVAL BASE CORONADO. CONSTRUCTION AND PERFORMANCE SERVICES FOR BOILER PLANT IMPROVEMENT AND ENERGY/UTILITY DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM.$51.8M
    Department of the Navy· San Diego County, CA· Professional services· Dec 13, 2016 – Dec 10, 2025· N3943017F1902
  2. ENERGY SAVINGS PERFORMANCE CONTRACT (ESPC) TASK ORDER NASA JSC COMBINED HEAT AND POWER (CHP) PROJECT$45.6M
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration· Warrick County, IN· Construction & real property· Jun 26, 2017 – Sep 22, 2026· NNJ15JM10T
  3. ESPC AT MCLB ALBANY$40.7M
    Department of the Navy· Dougherty County, GA· Professional services· Apr 17, 2017 – Mar 31, 2026· N6258310F0311
  4. TASK ORDER AWARD TO INCORPORATE DERA FOR FORT LIBERTY ACTION AREA GROUPS 1-3 PER THE ATTACHMENT APPENDIX A$26.2M
    Department of the Army· Cumberland County, NC· Professional services· Sep 28, 2024 – May 28, 2026· W912DY24F0594
  5. ENERGY SAVINGS PERFORMANCE CONTRACT TASK ORDER FOR RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK CAMPUS, RTP, NORTH CAROLINA$19M
    Environmental Protection Agency· Durham County, NC· Professional services· Sep 27, 2018 – Jun 24, 2026· 68HE0C18F0857
  6. ENERGY SAVINGS PERFORMANCE CONTRACT$18.1M
    Defense Logistics Agency· Davis County, UT· Professional services· Apr 12, 2018 – Jan 27, 2026· SP060418F8001
  7. ESPC DETROIT ARSENAL NEW STAND-ALONE CONTRACT TO REPLACE DACA87-97-D-0073-0004 PAYMENTS 140 - 145 FOR APRIL - SEPTEMBER 2023 INCLUDED$11.6M
    Department of the Army· St. Clair County, MI· Professional services· Aug 7, 2023 – May 29, 2026· W912DY23C0012
  8. ESPC PALO ALTO$10.7M
    Department of Veterans Affairs· Santa Clara County, CA· Professional services· Dec 12, 2016 – Dec 9, 2025· VA70114F0116

Competitors

Companies that win from the same buyers in the same markets: obligations by agency and industry compared over the last three fiscal years.

Compared on 8 markets (agency × industry), FY2024–FY2026.

  1. KALMAN & COMPANY, INC.$88.2M−53% in FY2026
    VIRGINIA BEACH, VA · 36% of this company's obligations are in markets they both serveNavy · Architectural, engineering, and related servicesArmy · Architectural, engineering, and related servicesEnvironmental Protection Agency · Architectural, engineering, and related services
  2. MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL, INC.$162.7M−72% in FY2026
    SAN DIEGO, CA · 9 entities · 40% of this company's obligations are in markets they both serveArmy · Architectural, engineering, and related servicesNavy · Architectural, engineering, and related services
  3. MERRICK-RS & H JOINT VENTURE LLP$41.7M−3.7% in FY2026
    GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO · 25% of this company's obligations are in markets they both serveNavy · Architectural, engineering, and related servicesArmy · Architectural, engineering, and related services

Showing the top 3 of 25 competitors. Open the profile for the full list.

Who sells to the same buyers in the same markets, not who wins against whom on a given contract. Prime contract obligations by the agency and NAICS code of each award; subawards are never added. A company is a family of legal entities, joined by parent UEI or, in part, by an AI reading of names.

Source: Federal contract transactions (Federal Procurement Data System) (U.S. Department of the Treasury, USAspending.gov), data current to Oct 9, 2026, loaded Oct 9, 2026 · FY2024–FY2026.

Source: Federal contract transactions (Federal Procurement Data System) (U.S. Department of the Treasury, USAspending.gov), data current to Oct 9, 2026, loaded Oct 9, 2026.