B-297225, Information Ventures, Inc., December 1, 2005

B-297225 Dec 01, 2005 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Information Ventures, Inc. (IVI), a small business, protests the terms of the synopsis and request for quotations issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Supply Systems Command, for toxicology research and support services for the Navy Environmental Health Center (NEHC) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. N00189-05-T-0534. IVI objects that the synopsis was defective, that the RFQ overstated the Navy's needs by requiring vendors to submit nine sample toxicology reports for evaluation, and that the RFQ improperly classified the required services as a commercial item. We deny the protest. View Decision B-297225, Information Ventures, Inc., December 1, 2005 Decision Matter of: Information Ventures, Inc. File: B-297225 Date: December 1, 2005 Bruce H. Kleinstein for the protester. Margaret H. Whittaker for ToxServices LLC, an intervenor. Davis Young, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Paul N. Wengert, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Where record shows that agency overstated its needs by requiring vendors to submit multiple examples of toxicology reports because agency report only justifies need to review one sample report, protest is nonetheless denied where protester has failed to show that it could have met requirement for even one sample report, and thus the overstated requirement did not result in competitive prejudice to the protester. DECISION Information Ventures, Inc. (IVI), a small business, protests the terms of the synopsis and request for quotations issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Supply Systems Command, for toxicology research and support services for the Navy Environmental Health Center (NEHC) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. N00189'05'T'0534. IVI objects that the synopsis was defective, that the RFQ overstated the Navy's needs by requiring vendors to submit nine sample toxicology reports for evaluation, and that the RFQ improperly classified the required services as a commercial item. We deny the protest. The Navy issued the RFQ on September 7, 2005. The RFQ sought quotations to provide toxicology services for a base period and 4 additional years on a fixed-price basis.[1] The vendor would provide various services, such as conducting –rigorous scientific research/review of the literature and other information to identify specific toxicological data needed to make a scientifically sound determination and provide timely and accurate comments.— As deliverables, the RFQ specified toxicological profiles for 40 chemicals, and responses to regulatory comments regarding the development of toxicological profiles. RFQ at 9-11. The RFQ provided that the agency would evaluate technical capability on a pass/fail basis, and would select the successful vendor (from among those that had received a –pass— on the technical factor) on the basis of a tradeoff between past performance and price. The technical evaluation was to consist of six technical subfactors, with a rating of –fail— on any one subfactor resulting in an overall technical rating of –fail.— RFQ at 6-7. For example, the first of the technical subfactors was described as: a. Proficient Development of Human Health Risk Assessment Reports following EPA [the Environmental Protection Agency]'s Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund (RAGS)-The provider shall be regularly engaged in writing the toxicological aspects of Human Health Risk Assessment Reports following RAGS. Experience documentation must include at least 3 risk assessment documents showing completed toxicity assessments. DoD [Department of Defense] reports are preferred. RFQ at 7 (emphasis in original).[2] On September 13, prior to the due date for submission of quotations, IVI filed its protest with our Office. In its agency report, the Navy submitted a statement from an environmental engineer responsible for the requirement. As background, the environmental engineer observed that the Navy is responsible for the clean-up of hazardous chemicals at multiple sites around the world.