Johnson Controls World Services, Inc., B-285144, July 6, 2000

B-285144 Jul 06, 2000 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Protest challenging terms of solicitation for base operations and maintenance services is denied where the protest grounds are factually unsupported or the protester has failed to establish that the challenged provisions prejudice the firm. This award and other aspects of this procurement were the subject of a number of successive protests by all three offerors under that RFP. The MDWAC contracting officer determined that acquisition of interim services on a month-to-month basis by sole-source purchase order was inefficient and did not provide for competition. Issued pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12 commercial item procedures to the three offerors that have been competing under the Corps's RFP. View Decision Matter of: Johnson Controls World Services, Inc. File: B-285144 Date: July 6, 2000 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Johnson Controls World Services, Inc. protests request for quotations (RFQ) No. DADW35-00-T-0142, issued by the Department of the Army, Military District of Washington Acquisition Center (MDWAC), Fort Belvoir, Virginia, for base operations and maintenance services for Fort Hamilton, Brooklyn, New York. We deny the protest. In March 1998, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York District, issued request for proposals (RFP) No. DACA51-98-R-0007, for the services for 1 year with 4 option years. Under the RFP, the Corps awarded a contract to Citywide Office Management Services. This award and other aspects of this procurement were the subject of a number of successive protests by all three offerors under that RFP, i.e., Johnson Controls, Citywide and Meridian Management Corporation. Our Office twice sustained protests against the Citywide award. See Johnson Controls World Servs., Inc.; Meridian Management Corp., B-281287.5 et al., June 21, 1999, 2000 CPD Para. ; Meridian Management Corp.; Johnson Controls World Servs., Inc., B-281287.10, B-281287.11, Feb. 8, 2000, 2000 CPD Para. __. Although the Corps awarded the contract to Citywide, it has stayed performance of that contract because of the various protests. Since April 1999, MDWAC has been obtaining interim services for Fort Hamilton under the protester's incumbent contract and, after that contract expired, under a series of month-long, sole-source purchase orders, each in excess of $500,000, issued, pursuant to commercial item procedures, to the protester. Following our February 8, 2000 decision, the Army transferred adminstration of the RFP source selection process from the Corps's New York District to its Philadelphia District. Subsequently, the MDWAC contracting officer determined that acquisition of interim services on a month-to-month basis by sole-source purchase order was inefficient and did not provide for competition, and, on March 31, 2000, issued the RFQ protested here. Agency Report at 2. The RFQ, issued pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12 commercial item procedures to the three offerors that have been competing under the Corps's RFP, contemplates the award of a fixed-price contract for a base period of 4 1/2 months with 8 option months. /1/ RFQ at 1-2, Sec. L.23, at L-13. The RFQ contains detailed specifications covering all aspects of the service requirements. The RFQ, as initially issued, requested technical and price proposals, and stated that award would be made based on the most advantageous offer, considering technical and price factors. RFQ Secs. L.34, M.4, M.7. Quotations were due by April 15. RFQ at 1. After the RFQ was issued, MDWAC met with the three solicited firms, and stated that technical proposals and cost information would not be required, and that quotes need only include a completed schedule of prices, as required by section B of the RFQ, and representations and certifications included in the RFQ. The agency stated that the firms would be considered "technically qualified" and that award would be made "to the lowest bidder." Agency Report at 2-3; Protest, Tab 1, Declaration of Johnson Controls' General Manager, at 2-3. On April 7, the agency amended the RFQ by deleting all sections that made reference to technical or cost proposals, and extending the submission due date to April 17. RFQ amend. 0001, at 3. The bottom-line quote prices on the RFQ are to be disclosed at a public bid opening. Contracting Officer's Statement at 4. Johnson Controls protested the RFQ on April 14. The protester alleges that the solicited services are not a commercial item, so that the RFQ was improperly issued under commercial item procedures. Protest at 7-8; Protester's Comments at 3-7.