Transcontinental Enterprises, Inc., B-294765, November 30, 2004

B-294765 Nov 30, 2004 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Transcontinental Enterprises, Inc. protests the agency's decision to award a contract to Call Henry, Inc., pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. PR-NC-03-10653, issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for facilities management and support services for its Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, facilities. The protester challenges the agency's affirmative determination of Call Henrys responsibility. We dismiss the protest. View Decision B-294765, Transcontinental Enterprises, Inc., November 30, 2004 Decision Matter of: Transcontinental Enterprises, Inc. File: B-294765 Date: November 30, 2004 Heath Carroll, Esq., Dixon, Doub, Conner & Foster, for the protester. Brian Koji, Esq., Allen, Norton & Blue, for Call Henry, Inc., an intervenor. Anthony G. Beyer, Esq., Environmental Protection Agency, for the agency. Edward Goldstein, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging an agencys affirmative determination of the awardees responsibility on the ground that the contracting officer failed to consider the fact that the awardee did not possess a North Carolina unlimited general contractors license at the time of award, and could not likely obtain the required license in a timely manner, if at all, is dismissed where the record shows that the license was not required to perform most of the work called for under the solicitation, if any work at all; thus, information regarding the awardees ability to obtain the license is not the type of information that would be expected to have a strong bearing on the awardees responsibility, and, as a result, an allegation that the agency failed to consider such information is not sufficient to trigger review by GAO of the agencys affirmative responsibility determination. DECISION Transcontinental Enterprises, Inc. protests the agencys decision to award a contract to Call Henry, Inc., pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. PR-NC-03-10653, issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for facilities management and support services for its Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, facilities. The protester challenges the agencys affirmative determination of Call Henrys responsibility. We dismiss the protest. On January 29, 2004, the agency issued the subject solicitation as a small business set-aside for the provision of all facilities support services at various EPA facilities located in the Research Triangle Park area of North Carolina. The RFPs statement of work set forth numerous specific facilities support services requirements. [1] In addition, as it relates to this protest, the RFP, as amended, stated that [t]he Contractor shall possess a State of North Carolina unlimited general Contractor license and shall establish and maintain a process for identifying, acquiring, and maintaining records of all permits required for performance of the work. Permits shall be obtained from the City/County Building Inspector . . . . RFP, Statement of Work, at 10. By the March 4 due date for receipt of proposals, the agency had received four proposals. After setting a competitive range, which included the offers of Transcontinental and Call Henry, holding discussions with the remaining offerors, and evaluating revised proposals, the agency decided to make award to Call Henry. As part of the award decision, the agency determined that Call Henry was a responsible firm, as required by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 9.103. In making this determination the agency considered Call Henrys financial resources, performance history, representations and certifications, as well as its organization, experience, and technical capability as reflected in its technical proposal. See Agency Report (AR) at 5. Upon learning of the agencys award decision, Transcontinental filed this protest challenging the agencys affirmative responsibility determination with regard to Call Henry. Transcontinental argues that the agency unreasonably found Call Henry responsible because the agency failed to consider that Call Henry did not possess a North Carolina unlimited general contractors license at the time of award; that Call Henry will not be able to timely obtain such a license, if at all; and that, as a consequence, Call Henry will not be able to obtain the necessary state permits to perform the work required under the solicitation. Our Office will not consider a protest challenging an affirmative determination of responsibility except under limited circumstances, because the determination that a particular contractor is capable of performing a contract is largely committed to the contracting officers discretion. 4 C.F.R. 21.5(c) (2004).