Robertson Leasing Corporation

B-275152 Jan 27, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Cancellation of solicitation is unobjectionable where the contracting officer reasonably determined that the requirement should be recompeted under relaxed specifications in order to increase competition and reduce costs to government. The RFP was issued August 1. Vehicles were to be stored in an indoor or outdoor facility. Six proposals were received by the extended September 18 closing date. [4] The technical evaluation board reviewed the proposals. Discussions were held on January 22. [5] and best and final offers (BAFO) were submitted by March 6. Four BAFOs were determined to be technically acceptable or capable of becoming technically acceptable. Have had facilities with sufficient capacity to handle the volume of vehicles in USMS custody. [6] USMS hoped to increase the usual level of competition by dividing the area to be serviced into two zones and allowing contractors to propose for only one zone. View Decision Matter of: Robertson Leasing Corporation File: B-275152 Date: January 27, 1997 Cancellation of solicitation is unobjectionable where the contracting officer reasonably determined that the requirement should be recompeted under relaxed specifications in order to increase competition and reduce costs to government, and the record does not support allegation of bad faith. Attorneys DECISION Robertson Leasing Corporation protests the cancellation of request for proposals (RFP) No. MS-95-R-0034, issued by the United States Marshals Service (USMS), Department of Justice, for towing, storage, and disposal services for seized and forfeited vehicles in San Diego County, California. Robertson challenges the cancellation as unreasonable and argues that the agency acted in bad faith in order to avoid awarding to Robertson or its only competitor, Abre Enterprises. We deny the protest. The RFP was issued August 1, 1995, and contemplated the award of two indefinite delivery contracts for a base year with four 1-year options. [1] The RFP required the successful offeror to tow vehicles from the locations where they had been seized by the government [2] to a facility operated by the contractor for storage until disposed of by auction or salvage. Vehicles were to be stored in an indoor or outdoor facility, depending upon value. [3] The RFP required offerors to submit with a technical proposal either: (1) proof of ownership of a facility, (2) a copy of a current lease to such a facility, (3) a copy of an "intent to lease" agreement, or (4) a copy of a contract to purchase a facility that would eventually meet the agency's requirements. Six proposals were received by the extended September 18 closing date. [4] The technical evaluation board reviewed the proposals, discussions were held on January 22, 1996, [5] and best and final offers (BAFO) were submitted by March 6. Four BAFOs were determined to be technically acceptable or capable of becoming technically acceptable. USMS had been concerned about limited competition under this solicitation because, historically, only two vendors, Robertson and Abre, have had facilities with sufficient capacity to handle the volume of vehicles in USMS custody. [6] USMS hoped to increase the usual level of competition by dividing the area to be serviced into two zones and allowing contractors to propose for only one zone. Then in March 1996, USMS began a review of this program and determined that if it could acquire its own land on which to operate the seizure and forfeiture services on a government-owned/contractor operated (GO/CO) basis, it could increase competition and have more options if one contractor should prove unsatisfactory. The agency started looking for possible sites to acquire or lease and, by letter dated April 17, requested that offerors extend their offers through September 30. All four offerors extended their offers. No decision was made on a course of action by September 27 and offerors were requested to extend their offers to December 31. Three offerors extended their offers through December, while Robertson extended its offer through October 31. In September, USMS learned that because of enforcement policy changes at INS, the number of vehicles being seized in the north zone had significantly decreased. In response, USMS issued an amendment on October 9 to revise the statement of work (SOW), incorporate updated wage determinations, revise the evaluation criteria, and request a second round of BAFOs. The revised SOW made the north zone contract for towing only and transferred all storage and disposal services to the south zone. On the same date, USMS learned that at least one appropriate site would be available within 6 months and that handling the procurement on a GO/CO basis was a viable option.