VSE Corporation, B-290452.2, <st1:date Year="2005" Day="11" Month="4">April 11, 2005</st1:date>

Case: B-290452.2 Agency: Protester: VSE Corporation, B Date: 2005-04-11 Denied
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
B-290452.2 Apr 11, 2005 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights VSE Corporation protests the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Bureau of Customs and Border Protections (CBP) cancellation of request for proposals (RFP) No. CS-00-007 for storage, maintenance, and disposition services to handle personal property seized by various federal agencies. We deny the protest. View Decision B-290452.2, VSE Corporation, April 11, 2005 DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Matter of: VSE Corporation File: B-290452.2 Date: April 11, 2005 William W. Goodrich, Jr., Esq., Lisa K. Miller, Esq., and Melissa D. Droller, Esq., Arent Fox, for the protester. Carmody A. Gaba, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, for the agency. Charles W. Morrow, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest against the cancellation of a solicitation for storage, maintenance, and disposition services to handle personal property seized by various federal agencies is denied, where the record evidences that the solicitation no longer accurately reflected the agency requirements and there are uncertainties as to how the solicitation will be funded that have not been resolved, and the agency believes that additional sources may submit proposals, given the almost 5-year period since initial proposals were submitted on this solicitation. DECISION VSE Corporation protests the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Bureau of Customs and Border Protections (CBP) cancellation of request for proposals (RFP) No. CS-00-007 for storage, maintenance, and disposition services to handle personal property seized by various federal agencies. We deny the protest. A significant resource of the federal government in its effort to prevent criminal activity has been the moneys derived from the sale of seized and forfeited property belonging to individuals who violated United States laws. To ensure that the moneys derived from the sale of forfeited and seized property involving criminal activity were specifically applied to the expenses of law enforcement programs, the government established several funds, one of which is the Treasury Forfeiture Fund, which is administered by the Treasury Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture (TEOAF) in the Department of Treasury. [1] As agent for the TEOAF, the U.S. Customs Service managed the contracts administering the seized property that support the fund. Since 1985, based on a GAO report and an Office of Management and Budget Circular A76 study, the Customs Service has utilized the services of one nationwide prime contractor to manage the program. In 1999, the Customs Service split the requirement into two nationwide contracts separating the real property requirements from the personal property requirements. In March 2000, the Customs Service (then part of the Department of Treasury) issued this RFP seeking proposals for a followon contract for nationwide services for the receipt, custody, management and disposition of seized and forfeited personal property. These services were to cover the inventory of seized property, such as vehicles, vessels, aircraft, and general property, which are covered by the TEOAF as well as property seized by certain other agencies. The RFP contemplated the award of a cost-plus-award-fee contract for a 4-month transition period (from September 19, 2000 to January 18, 2001), a base period (from January 19 to September 30), and nine 1-year options. The RFP provided for award to the offeror representing the best value, considering the merits and capability of the proposals, determined based on evaluating the acceptability and cost/price of the proposals as well as past performance, experience, understanding the requirements, and small business utilization. Prior to the receipt of initial proposals, the Customs Service issued amendment Nos.0001-0009 to the RFP. In addition to responding to the offerors questions, these amendments made extensive revisions to the RFP involving such matters as the statement of work, the simulated inventory of seized property, and the estimated workload projections. Four offerors--VSE; Day and Zimmerman Services, Inc.; Johnson Controls World Services, Inc.; and EG&G Technical Services, Inc. (the incumbent contractor)--responded to the RFP by the June 30, 2000 due date for receipt of proposals. After conducting oral interviews with each offeror, the Customs Service issued amendment No. 0010 on March 27, 2001, announcing that discussions would be held and that final technical proposal revisions were due to be submitted by April 30. Prior to the receipt of these technical proposal revisions, the Customs Service issued amendment Nos.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...