BMAR & Associates, Inc., B-281414, February 5, 1999

B-281414 Feb 05, 1999 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Allegation by small business contractor performing under an interim contract that the Small Business Administration (SBA) failed to properly determine the adverse impact on the protester of accepting a contract requirement for the same services into the 8(a) program is denied where the protester merely disagrees with SBA's conclusion and does not show any violation of applicable regulations. Concluded that the offering was suitable for acceptance under the program. The Army then decided to cancel the solicitation and instead to satisfy the requirement on an interim basis by issuing task orders under an existing Medical Command (MEDCOM) preventive maintenance contract with BMAR that was being administered through the Army Corps of Engineers in Mobile. View Decision Matter of: BMAR & Associates, Inc. File: B-281414 Date: February 5, 1999 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION BMAR & Associates, Inc. protests the decision by the Department of the Army and the Small Business Administration (SBA) to place request for proposals (RFP) No. DAKF19-98-R-0001 for maintenance and operations services in SBA's 8(a) business development program. BMAR, a small business contractor that has been performing these services on an interim basis since October 1997 through task orders placed under a previously awarded contract, contends that SBA did not properly analyze all relevant factors, as required by SBA regulations, in determining the adverse impact on BMAR from setting the requirement aside for the 8(a) program. We deny the protest. Previously, by letter dated July 29, 1996, the Directorate of Contracting at Fort Riley, Kansas offered a requirement for maintenance and operations services for all non-medical electrical and mechanical equipment at the Fort Riley MEDDAC/ DENTAC facilities and related energy plant to SBA for award under the 8(a) business development program. The SBA Wichita District Office determined that, because the requirement involved a new procurement, it would not be necessary to perform an adverse impact analysis, and concluded that the offering was suitable for acceptance under the program. Accordingly, SBA's Central Office accepted the offering as a competitive 8(a) procurement on August 15, 1996. On August 26, 1997, SBA Wichita requested that the solicitation be modified in a manner that would increase the number of 8(a) firms that would be eligible under the solicitation's experience requirements and thereby maximize competition. The Army requested release of the procurement from the 8(a) program based on the agency's concerns about whether the 8(a) firms that had attended a site visit had sufficient experience to perform the work successfully. However, after consulting further with SBA Wichita, the Army withdrew its request for release and agreed that the solicitation should be amended in the manner proposed by SBA. Citing significant delays encountered in the process of this procurement, the Army then decided to cancel the solicitation and instead to satisfy the requirement on an interim basis by issuing task orders under an existing Medical Command (MEDCOM) preventive maintenance contract with BMAR that was being administered through the Army Corps of Engineers in Mobile, Alabama. The MEDCOM contract is an indefinite-quantity contract under which task orders are negotiated and issued as fixed-price task orders for preventive maintenance services at various locations. It had been awarded to BMAR in May 1996 for a base year with 4 option years. The initial interim task order for the requirement at issue was placed with BMAR for a period of 6 months, from October 1, 1997 to March 31, 1998. On March 3, 1998, the Army cancelled the solicitation for this requirement, and so advised SBA on March 13. /1/ On March 27, the Army issued another 6-month task order for BMAR to continue providing the services. Subsequently, the contracting officer reassessed the requirement and again determined that it should be filled through the 8(a) program. By letter of April 1, 1998, the Army informed SBA Wichita that it intended to resolicit the requirement. Since there was now an incumbent small business contractor, SBA Wichita analyzed whether conditions were present which would require the presumption of an adverse impact on that contractor. SBA regulations provide that SBA will not accept into the 8(a) program a requirement previously met by a small business if doing so would have an adverse impact on other small business programs or on an individual small business. 13 C.F.R. Sec. 124.309(c) (1998). In this regard, the regulations state that SBA will consider "all relevant factors" in determining the impact of an 8(a) award. 13 C.F.R. Sec. 124.309(c)(1).