Teximara, Inc., B-293221.2, July 9, 2004

B-293221.2 Jul 09, 2004 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Teximara, Inc. protests the consolidation of grounds maintenance with 13other base operations support functions under request for proposals (RFP) No.F41689-02-R0048, issued by the Department of the Air Force for base operations support (BOS) at Kessler Air Force Base (AFB) in Mississippi. Teximara, a small business that performs grounds maintenance, contends that consolidation of grounds maintenance with the other functions violates the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) and the Small Business Act. We deny the protest. View Decision B-293221.2, Teximara, Inc., July 9, 2004 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: Teximara, Inc. File: B-293221.2 Date: July 9, 2004 Wayne A. Keup, Esq., Blank Rome, for the protester. Michael J. OFarrell, Esq., Department of the Air Force, and Laura Mann Eyester, Esq., Small Business Administration, for the agencies. Sharon L. Larkin, Esq., and David A. Ashen, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that solicitation that consolidated grounds maintenance with 13 other base operations support functions violated the Competition in Contracting Acts and the Small Business Acts bundling rules is denied where the agency reasonably determined that consolidation would result in significant efficiencies and savings, and is necessary to meet its needs. DECISION Teximara, Inc. protests the consolidation of grounds maintenance with 13other base operations support functions under request for proposals (RFP) No.F41689-02-R0048, issued by the Department of the Air Force for base operations support (BOS) at Kessler Air Force Base (AFB) in Mississippi. Teximara, a small business that performs grounds maintenance, contends that consolidation of grounds maintenance with the other functions violates the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) and the Small Business Act. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP is one of two solicitations issued as part of an agency effort to conduct Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76 cost comparison studies for 17 BOS functions at Kessler AFB. One solicitation, not protested here, is set aside exclusively for small business concerns and consolidates the following functions: communications and information technology, multimedia services, and publishing management. That solicitation is valued at approximately [REDACTED] annually. Contracting Officers Statement at 4. The RFP protested here consolidates nine civil engineering functions--housing, operation and maintenance, grounds and site maintenance, emergency management, utilities and energy management, engineering services, environmental management, resources management, and space management--with community services, human resources, supply services, marketing and publicity, and weather support. [1] The contract, with a 5month transition period, 1-year base period, and nine 1-year option periods, is to be awarded on the basis of full and open competition. The RFP is valued at approximately [REDACTED] annually; the grounds maintenance portion of this work is approximately either1.6 million (according to the protester) or $1.7million (according to the agency). Acquisition Strategy Panel Briefing Slides at 8; Small Business Coordination Record (Revision2) at 12; Hearing Transcript (Tr.) at1035. [2] The overall consolidation efforts here result from a number of Air Force concerns, including: (1) manpower constraints resulting from the fact that the Air Force currently exceeds the manpower ceiling set by the Office of the Secretary of Defense and therefore needs to reduce its workforce; (2) budgetary constraints, resulting from the agencys need to make available resources required for necessary recapitalization and modernization of equipment and operations, as well as the need to pay salaries for positions not currently funded because the Air Force has exceeded its manpower ceiling; and (3) a desire to more effectively and efficiently accomplish the agencys mission. Tr. at 36, 38-39, 299-300, 326, 447-50, 684. The consolidation efforts here are also based on the Air Forces A76 strategy. In this regard, the agency has concluded that consolidating functions is necessary because: (1) it has only a limited capacity to conduct multiple A-76 cost comparison studies; (2) it will reduce the additional turmoil to the agency workforce that would otherwise result from conducting multiple cost comparison studies and multiple reductions in workforce; and (3) it would allow offerors to maximize efficiencies in a manner that would not be available with multiple, more limited study areas.