Northwest Ecosystem Alliance

B-271636 Jul 12, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Department of Agriculture that NWEA is not a responsible contractor for purposes of award of a contract for the Thunder Salvage Timber Sale. NWEA was the high bidder in the sale auction. NWEA points out that by the sale's terms the contract was to be awarded based on the bid "most advantageous to the United States.". NWEA argues that it submitted the "most advantageous" bid in that the bid was the highest one received. We will not consider NWEA's protest to the extent it involves the Forest Service's decision to conduct the sale in the first instance. That is. An important reason for a salvage timber sale is the removal of diseased or insect-infested trees. Section 2001(e) provides that decisions by the Secretary of Agriculture in connection with salvage timber sales are not subject to administrative review. View Decision Matter of: Northwest Ecosystem Alliance File: B-271636 Date: July 12, 1996 Forest Service properly found high bidder for salvage timber sale to be nonresponsible after the bidder stated that it intended to leave the area unlogged instead of meeting the contract obligation to cut and log the timber. Attorneys DECISION Northwest Ecosystem Alliance (NWEA) protests the determination by the Forest Service, Department of Agriculture that NWEA is not a responsible contractor for purposes of award of a contract for the Thunder Salvage Timber Sale. We deny the protest. NWEA was the high bidder in the sale auction. Following the auction, however, NWEA advised the Forest Service that it had no intention of performing logging operations in the sale area, stating its desire that the area remain unlogged for a normal timber rotation period. The Forest Service then found NWEA nonresponsible and thus ineligible for the award on the grounds that NWEA had neither the ability nor the intent to perform the logging operations as required by the contemplated contract. In this respect, Forest Service regulations preclude a contracting officer from awarding a timber sale contract without first determining the purchaser responsible, considering factors such as the purchaser's ability to perform the contract within the contract term, the purchaser's performance record on timber sale contracts, and the purchaser's present possession of, or ability to obtain, equipment and supplies suitable for logging. 36 C.F.R. Sec. 223.100, 223.101. NWEA points out that by the sale's terms the contract was to be awarded based on the bid "most advantageous to the United States." NWEA argues that it submitted the "most advantageous" bid in that the bid was the highest one received, award to NWEA would entail no contract administration or environmental management (e.g., reforestation) costs, and award to NWEA would yield substantial ecological and resource benefits. We will not consider NWEA's protest to the extent it involves the Forest Service's decision to conduct the sale in the first instance, that is, NWEA's concerns about the sale's environmental and ecological impacts and NWEA's evident disagreement with the Forest Service regarding the need for and utility of the sale. Section 2001 of the fiscal year 1995 Rescissions Act, Pub. L. No. 104-19, 16 U.S.C.A. Sec. 1611 note (West Supp. 1996), addresses the Department of Agriculture's emergency salvage timber sale program. According to section 2001(a)(3), an important reason for a salvage timber sale is the removal of diseased or insect-infested trees, dead, damaged or down trees, and trees affected by fire or imminently susceptible to fire or insect attack, as well as "associated trees or trees lacking the characteristics of a healthy and viable ecosystem." Section 2001(e) provides that decisions by the Secretary of Agriculture in connection with salvage timber sales are not subject to administrative review, and section 2001(f) limits the judicial review of such decisions. [1] [2] Regarding whether the Forest Service properly found NWEA nonresponsible, the Thunder Salvage Timber Sale was to be awarded "to that responsible bidder whose bid, conforming to the invitation for bids, is most advantageous to the United States on the basis of total value at rates bid for the estimated quantities." NWEA's bid on its face conformed in that it evidenced no exception to the sale requirements, and its price in fact was the "most advantageous" on the advertised basis.