District Moving & Storage, Inc.; Guardian Storage, Inc.;

B-272070 Aug 09, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Provision that restricts award to only one of any affiliated offerors is not unduly restrictive of competition where the record shows that the agency reasonably concluded that multiple awards to affiliated offerors would be prejudicial to the government's interests. That the provision is reasonably necessary to meet the agency's minimum needs. Our Office has long held that contracting agencies are not required to reject offers from affiliated firms. Indefinite quantity contracts to firms that will pick up. Each contract will run for 1 base year. Award will be made to the firms whose offers are most advantageous to the government. Technical merit is more important than price. Section H.22 of the solicitation governs which contractors will be entitled to receive the most orders. View Decision Matter of: District Moving & Storage, Inc.; Guardian Storage, Inc.; and Quality Transport Services, Inc. File: B-272070 Date: August 9, 1996 Under solicitation that contemplates multiple awards, provision that restricts award to only one of any affiliated offerors is not unduly restrictive of competition where the record shows that the agency reasonably concluded that multiple awards to affiliated offerors would be prejudicial to the government's interests, and, thus, that the provision is reasonably necessary to meet the agency's minimum needs. Attorneys DECISION District Moving & Storage, Inc., Guardian Storage, Inc., and Quality Transport Services, Inc. protest the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. S-OPRAQ-96-R-0515, issued by the Department of State for non-temporary storage and related services. The protesters contend that the solicitation, which contemplates multiple awards, improperly restricts award to only one of any affiliated offerors. We deny the protest. Our Office has long held that contracting agencies are not required to reject offers from affiliated firms, or to limit them to one award, unless doing so would be prejudicial to the interests of the government or would give the affiliated offerors an unfair advantage over other offerors. See 39 Comp.Gen. 892 (1960); see also Fiber-Lam Inc., 69 Comp.Gen. 364 (1990), 90-1 CPD para. 351; Colonial Storage Co.; Paxton Van Lines, Inc., B-253501.5 et al., Oct. 19, 1993, 93-2 CPD para. 234; Pioneer Recovery Sys., Inc., B-214700; B-214878, Nov. 13, 1984, 84-2 CPD para. 520. This protest presents the question whether State may properly restrict award to only one of any affiliated offerors under this solicitation. The solicitation contemplates the award of five fixed-price, indefinite quantity contracts to firms that will pick up, receive, weigh, store, and deliver out of storage the household and personal effects of government employees arriving in and departing from the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. Each contract will run for 1 base year, with up to 4 option years. Award will be made to the firms whose offers are most advantageous to the government, considering technical merit and price. Technical merit is more important than price, but price may become the determining factor as the proposals become more equal in technical merit. The RFP sets forth five technical merit evaluation factors and requires offerors to include current financial statements along with their price proposals. Section H.22 of the solicitation governs which contractors will be entitled to receive the most orders. While each contractor will receive a minimum order, the lowest-priced contractor will be entitled to receive the most orders, followed by the next low-priced contractor, and so on. [1] A certain percentage of orders is also set aside for the contractors who perform quality service as defined in this section. Finally, the section provides that no contractor will receive more than 30 percent of the total projected annual volume. Section B.1 of the RFP contains the provision at issue in this protest: "NOTE: Only one company from affiliated companies shall be allowed to receive an award for this requirement. Affiliated is defined for the purpose of this solicitation as: Any business concerns, organizations, or individuals are affiliates of each other if, directly or indirectly, (a) either one controls or has the power to control the other, or (b) a third party controls or has the power to control both. Indicia of control include, but are not limited to, interlocking management or ownership, identity or interests among family members, shared facilities, equipment, and common use of employees." District, Guardian, and Quality, self-described as affiliated firms under the above definition, filed an agency-level protest objecting that this requirement is unduly restrictive of competition.