Vereinigte Geb�udereinigungsgesellschaft, B-280805, November

B-280805 Nov 23, 1998 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Protest that agency treated bidders unequally in reprocuring contract for custodial services is denied where record does not support protester's allegation that agency demanded that it produce bilingual management personnel immediately. Agency was not precluded from requiring a preaward demonstration of the linguistic abilities of a bidder's management personnel by the fact that such a demonstration had not been required under the original solicitation. The contract was awarded to PSG as a result of a reprocurement action after the Army terminated the original contractor. VGR contends that it should have received the award because it was qualified to perform and had offered a price lower than PSG's in response to the original invitation for bids (IFB). View Decision Matter of: Vereinigte Geb,,udereinigungsgesellschaft File: B-280805 Date: November 23, 1998 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Vereinigte Geb,,udereinigungsgesellschaft (VGR) protests the Department of the Army's award of contract No. DAJA89-98-D-0016, for custodial services at the Department of Defense (DOD) elementary and high schools in W rzburg, Germany, to Perfekt Service GmbH (PSG). The contract was awarded to PSG as a result of a reprocurement action after the Army terminated the original contractor, Z & H Sauberkeit, Hygiene, Gesundheit GmbH, for default. VGR contends that it should have received the award because it was qualified to perform and had offered a price lower than PSG's in response to the original invitation for bids (IFB). We deny the protest. BACKGROUND IFB No. DAJA89-98-B-0017, issued on April 17, 1998, sought bids to furnish custodial services for the DOD schools in W rzburg for a base and 2 option years, beginning on July 1, 1998. The solicitation required the assignment of a Project Supervisor to manage the contract and a Project Leader (or Leaders) to supervise the work at each of the two schools. /1/ To qualify as a Project Supervisor, an employee had to possess a certification known as a "Meisterbrief" and to qualify as a Project Leader, possession of a "Gesellenbrief" was required. /2/ IFB Sec. C-1.03.1. Each Project Supervisor and Project Leader also had to be able to write and speak both English and German fluently and to communicate with all of their foreign country employees. Id. The IFB required bidders to furnish proof of their Project Supervisor's Meisterbrief and Project Leaders' Gesellenbriefs to the contracting officer within 5 days of his request and warned that a failure to comply could result in a determination of nonresponsibility. IFB Sec. B.2(2). The agency explains that it included the requirements for Meister-and Gesellenbriefs in the IFB because it has been experiencing significant performance problems under its custodial services contracts in Germany. According to the Army, the contractors generally employ unskilled foreign workers at low wages, which results in a large turnover in contractor personnel and poor contract performance. To alleviate this problem, the Army has sought to contract with firms employing skilled project supervisors and leaders to train and supervise workers. Eight bids were opened on the May 18 opening date; VGR's price was fourth, and PSG's fifth, low. The low bidder, Hasenwinkel, was permitted to withdraw its bid after it informed the contracting officer that it could not furnish an employee with a Gesellenbrief to serve as a Project Leader and had failed to include the cost of such an employee in its bid price. The second low bidder, Schwaben Geb udereinigungs GmbH, was rejected as nonresponsible after failing to furnish proof that it could provide an employee with a Gesellenbrief. The third low bidder, Z & H Sauberkeit, Hygiene, Gesundheit GmbH, furnished Meisterbrief and Gesellenbrief documents in response to the contracting officer's request and was determined to be responsible. On June 22, the Army awarded Z & H a contract with a start date of July 1. At a pre-performance conference held on June 29, the contracting officer discovered that Z & H's proposed project supervisor did not speak English. At a second meeting, held on July 7, Z & H conceded that neither the supervisor nor its proposed project leaders could communicate in English and proposed to hire interpreters for them. The contracting officer advised Z & H that this was not acceptable and issued a cure notice. At a third meeting, held on July 27, the contracting officer reiterated that use of interpreters for the project supervisor and leaders was not acceptable. The Army terminated Z & H's contract for default on August 3. Because the services were urgently required and little time had elapsed since the original competition, the contracting officer decided to reprocure without resolicitation, pursuant to the discretion afforded him by the contract's default clause, Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sec.