Lawson Environmental Services, LLC

B-410576.4 Jul 21, 2015 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Coastal-Enviroworks Joint-Venture (Coastal), of Edgewood, New York, requests that our Office recommend that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reimburse its costs of pursuing its protest of the award of a contract to Integrated Environmental Solutions, Inc. (IES), under request for proposals (RFP) No. SOL-R-7-14-00008, issued for environmental lead remediation. We deny the request. We deny the request. View Decision 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:      Coastal-Enviroworks Joint-Venture--Costs File:                B-410576.4 Date:              July 21, 2015 Pamela J. Mazza, Esq., Megan C. Connor, Esq., and Peter B. Ford, Esq., Piliero Mazza PLLC, for the protester. Kathleen Clever, Environmental Protection Agency, for the agency. Lois Hanshaw, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Our Office will not recommend the reimbursement of the costs of filing and pursuing a protest where the agency took corrective action, unless the agency unduly delays taking corrective action in the face of a clearly meritorious protest; this standard is not met where the record shows that the initial protest was not clearly meritorious, and where, even if the supplemental protest was clearly meritorious, the agency did not unduly delay taking corrective action after receipt of the supplemental protest. DECISION Coastal-Enviroworks Joint-Venture (Coastal), of Edgewood, New York, requests that our Office recommend that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reimburse its costs of pursuing its protest of the award of a contract to Integrated Environmental Solutions, Inc. (IES), under request for proposals (RFP) No. SOL-R-7-14-00008, issued for environmental lead remediation.  We deny the request. BACKGROUND Issued on July 8, 2014, as a HUBZone small business set-aside, the RFP contemplated the award of a fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) contract for a base year and two one-year option periods for environmental remediation services.  RFP at 41, 42, 105, 107.[1]  The RFP stated that award would be made on a lowest-priced, technically-acceptable basis, considering five evaluation factors:  (1) corporate experience; (2) key personnel; (3) past performance; (4) project management plan; and (5) price.  Id. at 109-10, 112.  As relevant to corporate experience, the RFP required offerors to demonstrate at least five years of experience in environmental corporate experience, hazardous waste disposal, residential earthmoving, and excavation.  Id. at 109, 113.  The RFP advised that the experience and qualifications of only the prime contractor would be considered.  Id. at 109.  The RFP permitted the prime contractor to submit experience performed as a subcontractor, and required any such experience to be clearly identified.  Id.  Thus, to be deemed technically acceptable, the prime contractor was required to demonstrate that it met all minimum technical requirements on its own merits.  Id. at 112.  With respect to past performance, offerors were required to submit three client references demonstrating projects relevant to the performance work statement and technical factors.  Id. at 110.  Offerors were required to indicate whether projects had been performed as a prime contractor or subcontractor.  Id.  The RFP stated that team subcontracting experience would not be considered.  Id. Three offers were received by the RFP closing date.  IES’s proposal identified IES as the prime contractor that had performed the work offered for corporate experience and past performance.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 10, IES Proposal, at 415-21, 438-47.  IES also indicated that it would perform as the prime contractor on this acquisition.  Id. at 414, 421.  IES twice mentioned its sister company, Industrial & Environmental Services, LLC (Industrial) in its proposal.  The first reference described the type of work Industrial performs, while the second indicated that the two companies share financial, labor, and equipment resources when completing projects.  Id. at 415, 468.  After reviewing proposals, the source selection team determined that all offers were technically acceptable and selected IES for award as the lowest-priced offeror.  Tab 44, Source Selection Decision, at 1133, 1136-37.  As relevant here, Coastal’s initial protest alleged that IES lacked the required corporate experience and past performance because Coastal was unable to find any contracts awarded to IES through various internet searches.  Protest at 5.