B-298370; B-298490, Brian X. Scott, August 18, 2006

B-298370; B-298490, Brian X. Scott, August 18, 2006 TITLE: B-298370; B-298490, Brian X. Scott, August 18, 2006 BNUMBER: B-298370; B-298490 DATE: August 18, 2006 *************************************************** B-298370; B-298490, Brian X. Scott, August 18, 2006 Decision Matter of: Brian X. Scott File: B-298370; B-298490 Date: August 18, 2006 Brian X. Scott for the protester. Maj. Peter G. Hartman, Department of the Army, 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 Solicitations for cargo transportation and security services and for base security services in Iraq will not result in an award that violates the Anti-Pinkerton Act or Department of Defense policies regarding contractor personnel because the services required under the resultant contract are guard and protective services, and not "quasi-military armed forces" activities. DECISION Brian X. Scott protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) Nos. W91GY0-06-R-0015 (RFP-0015) and W91GER-06-R-0013 (RFP-0013), issued by the Department of the Army, Joint Contracting Command-Iraq/Afghanistan, for cargo transportation and security services in and around Iraq and for base security services in Iraq.[1] The protester contends that each solicitation's statement of work (SOW) requires performance of security services that constitute the provision of "quasi-military armed forces for hire," which would result in the award of a contract that violates the Anti-Pinkerton Act, 5 U.S.C. sect. 3108 (2000), and Department of Defense (DoD) instructions and regulations. We deny the protests. BACKGROUND RFP-0015 was issued on May 14, 2006, and anticipates multiple awards of indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) contracts with fixed-price task orders for cargo transportation services in Iraq, Kuwait, and Jordan. The base ordering period is 1 year, with one 6-month option period. Offerors are required to propose vehicles, personnel, and other equipment necessary for contract performance. The SOW requires contractors to provide security escorts for the cargo convoys, including a "minimum of three (3) vehicle escorts with radios and weapons for every 10 transportation trucks and 5 ton trucks (includes 2 1/2 ton trucks) [and] [f]or all sensitive cargo the contractor will include a minimum of two (2) Ex-Pat security escort vehicles." RFP-0015, SOW, at 2. RFP-0013 was issued on June 19, 2006, and anticipates multiple awards of ID/IQ contracts with fixed-price task orders for internal security operations services at the Victory Base Complex (VBC) in Iraq. The base ordering period is from the date of contract award until July 2008, with one 6-month option period. Offerors are required to propose "all labor, weapons, equipment, and other essential requirements to supplement and augment security operations" at VCB. RFP-0013, SOW, para. 1. The RFP describes the security requirements as follows: The objective is to maintain a high level of security at select entry control points and perimeter security operations. The tasks will be accomplished by providing internal operations at entry control points, manning perimeter towers, securing selected facilities, providing armed escorts for local national laborers, and maintaining a liaison cell at Area Defense Operations Centers (ADOC) and the Base Defense Operations Center (BDOC). Id. Contractors must also "provide management/administrative oversight of designated (in this SOW) security functions and personnel," and "shall repel and control any unlawful or destructive activity directed towards the VCB." Id. paras. 1.1.1, 1.1.2. The agency states that contracts that require provision of armed personnel, such as those anticipated by the two solicitations, are subject to DoD Instruction (DoDI) No. 3020.41, "Contractor Personnel Authorized to Accompany the U.S. Armed Forces." The DoDI "establishes and implements policy and guidance, assigns responsibilities, and serves as a comprehensive source of DoD policy and procedures concerning DoD contractor personnel authorized to accompany the U.S. Armed Forces." DoDI No. 3020.41, at 1. The DoDI categorizes contractor personnel who are authorized to accompany U.S. Armed Forces as "contingency contractor personnel." Id. These personnel are considered civilians under the Geneva Convention. Id. paras. 6.1.1, E.2.1.3. DISCUSSION The protester contends that the security requirements of both solicitations violate the Anti-Pinkerton Act and DoDI No.