B-309751, The Borenstein Group, Inc., September 26, 2007

B-309751 Sep 26, 2007 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The Borenstein Group, Inc. protests the cancellation of request for proposals (RFP) No. W91WAW-07-R-0063, issued by the Contracting Center of Excellence (CCE) on behalf of the Office of the Chief of the Army Reserve (OCAR) for management, manpower, and logistics support for the commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the U.S. Army Reserve. The Borenstein Group contends that the decision to cancel the solicitation lacked a reasonable basis. The Borenstein Group also contends that the procurement of this requirement through an existing indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) contract is outside the scope of that contract. We deny the protest. View Decision B-309751, The Borenstein Group, Inc., September 26, 2007 Decision Matter of: The Borenstein Group, Inc. File: B-309751 Date: September 26, 2007 Gal Borenstein for the protester. Capt. John Pritchard, Department of the Army, for the agency. Eric M. Ransom and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Agency had a reasonable basis to cancel request for proposals for management, manpower, and logistics support where the record shows that the agency's requirements could be fulfilled through an existing contract determined to be more advantageous to the government. DECISION The Borenstein Group, Inc. protests the cancellation of request for proposals (RFP) No. W91WAW-07-R-0063, issued by the Contracting Center of Excellence (CCE) on behalf of the Office of the Chief of the Army Reserve (OCAR) for management, manpower, and logistics support for the commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the U.S. Army Reserve. The Borenstein Group contends that the decision to cancel the solicitation lacked a reasonable basis. The Borenstein Group also contends that the procurement of this requirement through an existing indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) contract is outside the scope of that contract. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND OCAR created the overall concept of the Army Reserve Commemoration Program (Program) to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the U.S. Army Reserve, and broadly identified a requirement to support the Program in December 2006. On December 21, 2006, OCAR issued Request for Task Order (RFTO) 07-003 under the U.S. Army Communication and Electronics Command's (CECOM) Worldwide Army Advertising (WAA) ID/IQ contract, for Army Reserve public relations support for fiscal year 2007. Agency Report (AR), Tab 6. This RFTO covered a wide variety of public relations support requirements, mostly unrelated to the Program. However, the RFTO did contain the key deliverable to –[d]evelop programs required to implement strategic campaign plans including the 100 year anniversary of the Army Reserve.— Id. at 1. CECOM ultimately procured the RFTO 07-003 –program development— support requirement on April 13, through issuance of Task Order 14 under the WAA contract. AR, Tab 8. Meanwhile, between December 2006 and April 2007, OCAR developed a more specific list of deliverables for the Program and, on April 12, requested that CCE procure the necessary contractor support. AR, Tab 4, at 1. OCAR suggests that it submitted this request to CCE, rather than CECOM, because, due to changes in OCAR personnel, it was not aware of the possibility of using the CECOM WAA contract for these specific deliverables at the time.[1] AR at 2-3. Later that month, OCAR and CCE issued a –sources sought— synopsis for the management, manpower, and logistics support requirement, requesting capabilities statements from small businesses. AR, Tab 9. Sometime in late April or early May, OCAR discovered that all of its Program deliverables might be within the scope of CECOM's WAA contract, AR, Tab 5, at 1, and, on May 14, requested that CECOM issue an RFTO under the WAA contract for the management, manpower, and logistics support requirement. AR, Tab 10. Shortly thereafter, on June 7, CCE proceeded with the negotiated procurement by issuing the RFP as a small business set-aside. Later in June, however, OCAR began to reconsider continuing the CCE negotiated procurement, in light of the CECOM RFTO. After giving consideration to the ability of the WAA contractor to begin immediately, and the WAA contractor's past performance, management approach, and experience, OCAR determined that meeting its requirements through the existing WAA contract would be more advantageous to the government, and that the CCE RFP should be cancelled. On June 26, OCAR requested feedback from CECOM on whether the Program requirements being sought were within the scope of the WAA contract. The CECOM Procuring Contracting Officer responded with a preliminary determination that the deliverables were within scope. AR, Tab 15, at 1.