B-296358.3; B-296358.4, DOR Biodefense, Inc.; Emergent BioSolutions, January 31, 2006

Case: B-296358.3 Agency: Protester: B Date: 2006-01-31 Denied
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
B-296358.3; B-296358.4, DOR Biodefense, Inc.; Emergent BioSolutions, January 31, 2006 TITLE: B-296358.3; B-296358.4, DOR Biodefense, Inc.; Emergent BioSolutions, January 31, 2006 BNUMBER: B-296358.3; B-296358.4 DATE: January 31, 2006 ************************************************************************************* B-296358.3; B-296358.4, DOR Biodefense, Inc.; Emergent BioSolutions, January 31, 2006 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. Decision Matter of: DOR Biodefense, Inc.; Emergent BioSolutions File: B-296358.3; B-296358.4 Date: January 31, 2006 Jessica C. Abrahams, Esq., Jeniffer M. De Jesus, Esq., Stephen E. Ruscus, Esq., and Frank M. Rapoport, Esq., McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, for the protesters. Helaine G. Elderkin, Esq., Carl J. Peckinpaugh, Esq., and Cheralyn S. Cameron, Esq., for Computer Science Corp., an intervenor. Scott N. Flesch, Esq., Department of the Army, and Eric Lile, Esq., Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical and Biological Defense, for the agency. Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that modification of contract for research and development of botulinum vaccine was outside scope of the original contract is denied where changes did not substantially alter the contract's type of work, costs or period of performance beyond that which could have been reasonably anticipated by offerors. DECISION DOR Biodefense, Inc. and Emergent BioSolutions protest the issuance of modification P00186 of contract No. DAMD17-98-C-8024 by the Department of the Army Space and Missile Command to DynPort Vaccine Company, LLC (DVC).[1] The protesters contend that the modification was beyond the scope of the original contract, and thus was an improper sole-source award to DVC. The protesters also contend that the agency failed to take reasonable corrective action in response to earlier protests concerning the modification. We deny the protests. BACKGROUND The agency awarded a contract to DVC, under solicitation No. DAMD17-95-R-5020 (RFP) in 1997. The contract was issued by the Joint Vaccination Acquisition Program (JVAP), which was established in 1996 by the Department of Defense (DOD) to develop and stockpile biological defense vaccines for use by the U.S. military. Memorandum of Law at 1-2. The JVAP issued the RFP in August 1996, seeking proposals for award of a contract to a prime systems contractor for the management of vaccine development, licensure and production efforts. Id. at 2. The contractor was required to "use information and materials from the existing DoD program to create and execute an integrated approach leading to FDA [Food and Drug Administration] licensure and long term production/stockpiling of each vaccine (life cycle management to the point of product release to the DoD distribution chain)." RFP at C-1. Offerors were required to propose a comprehensive technical approach to meeting DOD's biological defense needs. Offerors were required to propose an Integrated Master Plan (IMP) that described their approach to "the core activities and processes necessary to achieve the program objectives (i.e. the [statement of objectives])." RFP attach. 1, IMP Instructions, at 1. The RFP, however, did not specify particular technical approaches for vaccine development, but rather identified general process requirements and the types of biological threats that the agency could select for vaccine development and production. The RFP listed contract line item numbers (CLINs) for general requirements such as systems integration, hazard risk insurance, storage and maintenance of intermediaries, and special studies, as well as development of three vaccines for protection against Q-fever, vaccinia, and tularemia. RFP at B-2. The RFP listed optional CLINs for development and licensure of biological warfare vaccines for the following vaccines: monovalent and multivalent botulinum serotypes, ricin, staphylococcal enterotoxin B, venezuelan equine encephalitis, combined Venezuelan/eastern/western equine encephalitis, brucellosis, plague, improved anthrax, and vaccinia immune globulin. Id. As relevant here, optional CLIN 0016 required development of a tetravalent botulinum vaccine for serotypes A, B, E and F.[2] Id. The RFP advised offerors that it reserved the right to "change the list above to add or delete products as the need may arise." RFP at B-1, C-1. All of the vaccines developed under the contract require approval and licensure by the FDA. RFP at C-1.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...