Advanced Elevator Services, Inc.

Advanced Elevator Services, Inc. BNUMBER: B-272340; B-272340.2 DATE: September 26, 1996 TITLE: Advanced Elevator Services, Inc. ********************************************************************** Matter of:Advanced Elevator Services, Inc. File: B-272340; B-272340.2 Date:September 26, 1996 Rene' A. Marques for the protester. Scarlett D. Grose, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency. Paula A. Williams, Esq., John Van Schaik, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest by small business that solicitation for elevator/escalator maintenance services, which combines the services on a regional basis rather than on a local basis as was previously done, unduly restricts competition is denied because the agency is not required to separately obtain these services where the agency's overall needs can be most effectively provided through a consolidated procurement approach. DECISION Advanced Elevator Services, Inc., a small business, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. GS06P96GXC0029, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) for multiple region elevator/escalator maintenance services. The protester contends that the RFP is unduly restrictive because it combines these services, which were previously awarded on a local basis, into multiple region groups by equipment manufacturer, thereby excluding small business participation. We deny the protest. Prior to the issuance of the RFP, GSA established a Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) team to study various methods to improve and streamline the procurement process for elevator maintenance services while reducing overall costs. The BPR team solicited the views of major elevator manufacturers, small businesses, other industry organizations, and regional procurement officials within GSA and other federal agencies. The BPR team examined several approaches to the delivery of these services, including the advantages and disadvantages of contracting on a nationwide, regional, or local basis. The BPR concluded that nationwide elevator maintenance contracting was the approach best suited to improving services to GSA's tenant agencies while reducing costs. As an implementation tool, the BPR team recommended contracting on a regional basis as a pilot program before going nationwide. The RFP's specifications were prepared based on the findings and recommendations of the BPR team. The RFP contemplated award of up to five, fixed-price contracts with economic price adjustment for services at 178 federal buildings in three GSA regions which span 15 states. Each contract will be for a 5-year base period with two 5-year bilateral options.[1] To be considered for award, the solicitation required offerors to submit offers for all buildings within a group; the buildings were grouped by elevator manufacturer.[2] Advanced Elevator, an incumbent at one of the buildings, contends that consolidating the elevator service requirements into five multiple region contracts is unduly restrictive because the requirements are larger than any small business firm can provide since the equipment is located in 15 different states and a response time of 1 to 3 hours is required by the solicitation.[3] The protester maintains that the requirements should be divided into several solicitations to allow increased competition as required by applicable procurement laws and regulations. In addition, Advanced Elevator alleges that grouping the equipment by manufacturer gives those manufacturers, only one of which is an American-owned firm, an unfair competitive advantage. In response, GSA questions the extent to which small businesses are prejudiced by the requirements of the solicitation. The agency explains that it considered the impact of grouping its requirements by region on small business participation and concluded that the contracts to be awarded under this solicitation are in the dollar range that is within the capability of small businesses. Moreover, GSA contends, nothing in the solicitation prohibits small businesses from forming joint ventures or other teaming arrangements in the event that an individual small business does not operate within the entire 15-state area. GSA further maintains that, in any case, award of multi-regional elevator maintenance contracts would best accommodate the agency's need to provide quality service to its tenant agencies while achieving significant savings. Specifically, GSA argues that because of downsizing and a decrease in its operating budget, the agency does not have sufficient personnel or resources to continue to award and administer 103 separate contracts for elevator maintenance services in these three regions.