EAI Corporation, B-283129, October 7, 1999

B-283129 Oct 07, 1999 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Agency's decision not to set aside portion of solicitation for exclusive small business participation was proper where agency reasonably determined that requirement to operate information analysis center for chemical and biological warfare and requirement to perform additional research tasks in the same subject areas are interrelated and interdependent. Such that partitioning the requirements is not practicable. Should have been partially set aside for exclusive small business participation. The purpose of the CBIAC is to provide scientific and technical analysis and technical advisory services to assist the chemical and biological defense community in meeting technical and operational objectives relating to chemical warfare and chemical biological defense. View Decision Matter of: EAI Corporation File: B-283129 Date: October 7, 1999 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION EAI Corporation protests that Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) request for proposals (RFP) No. SPO700-99-R-0050, which calls for contractor to establish and operate a chemical warfare/chemical and biological defense information analysis center (CBIAC), should have been partially set aside for exclusive small business participation. We deny the protest. The purpose of the CBIAC is to provide scientific and technical analysis and technical advisory services to assist the chemical and biological defense community in meeting technical and operational objectives relating to chemical warfare and chemical biological defense. RFP at 36. The successful contractor will perform basic or core center functions, as well as additional technical area tasks (TAT). The basic functions include information collection, information processing, information analysis, and information dissemination. Id. at 38-44. TATs are over and above the core center functions and can be ordered by qualified users in 20 subject areas. Id. at 45-68. EAI argues that the solicitation should be divided into two components--the core IAC function, and the TAT function--and that one of the portions should be set aside for exclusive small business participation. In the alternative, EAI argues that some of the individual TATs should be set aside for small business participation. /1/ Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sec. 19.502-3 requires, in relevant part, that a portion of an acquisition be set aside for exclusive small business participation when a total set-aside is not appropriate, and the requirement is severable into two or more economic production runs or reasonable lots. The determination as to whether a particular acquisition should be partially set aside is left to the discretion of the contracting officer, provided the determination is reasonably supported. Digital Sys. Group, Inc., B-258262.2, Jan. 20, 1995, 95-1 CPD Para. 30 at 7. DLA determined that no portion of the TATs can be set aside because, while the solicitation lists 20 areas in which TATs can be ordered, any specific TAT can cover more than one area. Supplemental Report, Aug. 25, 1999, at 10-11. The agency is concerned that dividing the TATs by area may result in multiple contractors performing a specific TAT, id. at 10, which would increase the cost to the requesting activity and, more importantly, would increase the potential for inadequate responses or errors due to contractors' inability to determine which part of the TAT falls within their jurisdiction. Id. at 11. Finally, the agency is concerned that the need to coordinate the efforts among the contractors would cause delays in the response time to the TATs. Id. We think the agency's concerns provided a reasonable basis for its conclusion that it would be impracticable to set aside one or more of the TATs for small businesses. Specifically, we think it is reasonable to anticipate that responses to TATs could be degraded or delayed due to the need to divide responsibilities among different contractors, and that the involvement of more than one contractor in a TAT would increase the cost to the user. Further, while it seems conceivable that a given TAT could concern only a single research area, and thus could be effectively performed as a partial set-aside, it is not apparent how the agency reasonably could determine this in advance. We conclude that the TATs are not severable by research area. In any case, we find that the agency has established a sound basis for having the TATs and the core functions performed by a single contractor. In this regard, DLA explains that the CBIAC (as well as other IACs covering different subject areas) were established to perform both the core functions and additional tasks that go beyond the scope of, but are directly related to, the core functions. Supplemental Report, Aug. 25, 1999, at Tab A.