The Gerard Company

B-274051 Nov 08, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Protest that agency was required to award contract to protester. As soon as Small Business Administration (SBA) issued certificate of competency (COC) concerning the protester is denied. " the thrust of this provision is simply that the agency cannot deny award to the eligible firm on the basis of other responsibility or eligibility criteria. Proposals were submitted on November 16. The evaluation of the proposals was not completed until January 22. GSA explains that these requests were premature and should not have occurred until the technical evaluation was completed. The contracting officer concluded that Gerard was nonresponsible and. Since the firm is a small business. The SBA issued a COC concerning Gerard and informed the agency: "You are obligated to award the contract to the certified concern without requiring it to meet any other condition of responsibility or eligibility.". View Decision Matter of: The Gerard Company File: B-274051 Date: November 8, 1996 Protest that agency was required to award contract to protester, without requesting best and final offers (BAFO), as soon as Small Business Administration (SBA) issued certificate of competency (COC) concerning the protester is denied. Although regulation states "the contracting officer shall award the contract to the concern in question if the SBA issues a COC after receiving the referral," the thrust of this provision is simply that the agency cannot deny award to the eligible firm on the basis of other responsibility or eligibility criteria; the regulation does not mandate an immediate award to the firm if the agency has legitimate reasons to amend the solicitation and request BAFOs. Attorneys DECISION The Gerard Company protests the failure of the General Services Administration (GSA) to award it a contract under request for proposals (RFP) No. FCXA-S8-930004-N for marketing and advertising services for the Public Buildings Service. We deny the protest. [1] GSA issued the RFP on August 29, 1994, and issued six solicitation amendments over the next several months. Proposals were submitted on November 16, 1994, but the evaluation of the proposals was not completed until January 22, 1996. During the evaluation, contracting officials requested that GSA's Credit and Finance Division perform pre-award surveys on several offerors, including Gerard, in order to determine the financial capacity of those firms. GSA explains that these requests were premature and should not have occurred until the technical evaluation was completed. After evaluating the proposals, the contracting officer established a competitive range, which included Gerard's proposal. The agency then conducted discussions with the competitive range offerors and requested revisions to their price proposals. Gerard responded to the discussions with a submission which included a revised price proposal labeled "Best and Final Marketing and Advertising Services." On February 9, 1996, GSA's Credit and Finance Division issued a recommendation of "no award" concerning Gerard. The contracting officer concluded that Gerard was nonresponsible and, since the firm is a small business, in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sec. 19.602-1(a)(2) (FAC 90-40), referred the matter to the Small Business Administration (SBA) for review under its certificate of competency (COC) procedures. In a June 5 letter, the SBA issued a COC concerning Gerard and informed the agency: "You are obligated to award the contract to the certified concern without requiring it to meet any other condition of responsibility or eligibility." At approximately the same time, the contracting officer reviewed the solicitation since 2 years had passed since it was issued. Based on that review, on August 1, 1996, the agency issued a seventh RFP amendment in order to conform the solicitation to provisions of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (FASA), Pub. L. No. 103-355, 108 Stat. 3243 (1994), to clarify ambiguities in the solicitation and to address agency requirements not included in the RFP. The agency reports that it needed to make these changes to ensure satisfaction of the government's minimum needs. The seventh amendment also requested best and final offers (BAFO). [2] Gerard objects to the request for BAFOs. According to Gerard, "[t]he contract was awarded to Gerard, if no other way, then by operation of law governing such an award." In support of this argument, Gerard refers to the SBA's June 5 letter issuing the COC concerning Gerard and stating: "You are obligated to award the contract to the certified concern without requiring it to meet any other condition of responsibility or eligibility." Gerard argues that its position also is supported by FAR Sec.