SSR Engineers, Inc., B-282244, June 18, 1999

B-282244 Jun 18, 1999 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The agency's determination is based on SSR's prior preparation of the statement of work and development of the cost estimates being used by the agency for the protested procurement. SSR was awarded an architect-engineering services contract requiring that it "develop a long range comprehensive master plan to replace the overhead primary electrical. The agency states that volume I of the three-volume master plan prepared by SSR under the prior contract is being used as the statement of work for the protested procurement. That volume I also contains the cost calculations that are the basis for the agency's budgetary estimates. /1/ Contracting Officer's Statement at 1. This protest was filed with our Office. View Decision Matter of: SSR Engineers, Inc. File: B-282244 Date: June 18, 1999 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION SSR Engineers, Inc. protests the Department of the Navy's determination to exclude SSR from a procurement for changes to the electrical distribution system at Keesler Air Force Base, Biloxi, Mississippi, under request for proposals (RFP) No. N62467-99-R-0883, because of an organizational conflict of interest. The agency's determination is based on SSR's prior preparation of the statement of work and development of the cost estimates being used by the agency for the protested procurement. We deny the protest. The record shows that, in April 1996, SSR was awarded an architect-engineering services contract requiring that it "develop a long range comprehensive master plan to replace the overhead primary electrical, cable television, and Energy Management and Control System (EMCS) lines with new underground lines at Keesler AFB in Biloxi, Mississippi." Contract No. F22600-96-D-0010, Statement of Work Sec. 2.1. The agency states that volume I of the three-volume master plan prepared by SSR under the prior contract is being used as the statement of work for the protested procurement, and that volume I also contains the cost calculations that are the basis for the agency's budgetary estimates. /1/ Contracting Officer's Statement at 1, 3. Volume II of the master plan, as described by SSR itself, "includes the power flow analysis, short circuit analysis, and coordination analysis for the proposed underground distribution system" and "contains printouts from the computer programs used to evaluate the distributions systems." Protester's Comments at 1. Volume III of the master plan reflects SSR's efforts to "develop generic specifications that would be given to an A/E firm as a guide for developing detailed construction specifications." Id. On February 5, 1998, the agency's contracting officer advised SSR that, due to the conflict of interest created by SSR's work under the prior contract, SSR would not be permitted to participate in this procurement. /2/ Subsequently, this protest was filed with our Office. Subpart 9.5 of the FAR generally requires contracting officials to avoid, neutralize or mitigate potential significant organizational conflicts of interest, including precluding a particular firm from competing, so as to prevent unfair competitive advantages, the existence of conflicting roles that might impair a contractor's objectivity, or the existence of biased ground rules created, whether intentional or not, in situations where, for example, a firm writes the statement of work or specifications. Aetna Gov't Health Plans, Inc.; Foundation Health Fed. Servs., Inc., B-254397.15 et al., July 27, 1995, 95-2 CPD Para. 129 at 12; GIC Agric. Group, B-249065, Oct. 21, 1992, 92-2 CPD Para. 263 at 6. Specifically, FAR Sec. 9.505-2(b)(1) states: If a contractor prepares, or assists in preparing, a work statement to be used in competitively acquiring a system or services--or provides material leading directly, predictably, and without delay to such a work statement--that contractor may not supply the system, major components of the system or the services unless: (i) It is the sole source; (ii) It has participated in the development and design work; or (iii) more than one contractor has been involved in preparing the work statement. The responsibility for determining whether a firm has a conflict of interest and to what extent a firm should be excluded from competition rests with the procuring agency, and we will not overturn such a determination unless it is shown to be unreasonable. Ressler Assocs., Inc., B-244110, Sept. 9, 1991, 91-2 CPD Para. 230 at 2-3; LW Planning Group, B-215539, Nov. 14, 1984, 84-2 CPD Para. 531 at 4. SSR does not dispute that it essentially prepared the statement of work and the cost estimates being used by the agency in this procurement. Further, SSR does not suggest that any of the exceptions contained in FAR Sec. 9.505-2(b)(1), quoted above, are applicable here.