Bannum Inc.

B-411074.5 Oct 10, 2017 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Bannum, Inc., of Odessa, Florida, protests its exclusion from the competitive range under request for proposals (RFP) No. RFP-200-1244-WS, which was issued by the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), for residential reentry center and home confinement services. Bannum objects to the agency's request for updated right-to-use documentation, and maintains that its rejection on that basis was improper. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. 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:  Bannum, Inc. File:  B-411074.5 Date:  October 10, 2017 Nancy M. Camardo, Esq., Joseph A. Camardo Jr., Esq., and Justin T. Huffman, Esq., Camardo Law Firm, P.C., for the protester. Alex D. Tomaszczuk, Esq., Alexander B. Ginsburg, Esq., and Aaron S. Ralph, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, for Volunteers of America Greater New Orleans, Inc., the intervenor. William D. Robinson, Esq., Seth M. Bogin, Esq., and Sarah Bloom, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, for the agency. Noah B. Bleicher, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging agency’s decision to exclude protester’s proposal from the competition is denied where the record shows that the agency’s request for updated right-to-use documentation was unobjectionable, and the protester’s failure to provide the documentation supported the exclusion of the proposal. DECISION Bannum, Inc., of Odessa, Florida, protests its exclusion from the competitive range under request for proposals (RFP) No. RFP-200-1244-WS, which was issued by the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), for residential reentry center and home confinement services.  Bannum objects to the agency’s request for updated right-to-use documentation, and maintains that its rejection on that basis was improper. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The solicitation, which BOP issued more than 3 and a half years ago, sought proposals for the award of a fixed-price indefinite-delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract for a 1-year base period and four 1-year options.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 3, RFP, at 3-4, 150, 222.  The awardee was to provide residential reentry center and home confinement services for federal offenders in several parishes in Louisiana.  Id. at 4.  Pursuant to the RFP, award was to be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal was determined to be in the best interest of the government, considering past performance, technical/management, and price.  Id. at 227.  The RFP identified six technical/management evaluation factors, including a site location factor that was comprised of two subfactors:  site validity and suitability; and community relations program.  Id. at 229.  With respect to the site validity and suitability subfactor, the RFP explained that the agency would evaluate the offeror’s proposed site location and consider the validity of the offeror’s right-to-use and zoning approval documentation.  Id.  The assessment was to consider both the “legality of the instrument and the nature of the interest.”[1]  Id.  In addition, the RFP required that the contractor’s facility had to be “fully operational and ready for performance to begin within 120 days after the date of contract award.”  Id. at 150. BOP received proposals from Bannum and Volunteers of America Greater New Orleans, Inc. (VOA) in June 2014.  Following the evaluation of proposals, the contracting officer, who was also the source selection authority, selected Bannum’s $12.2 million proposal for award in January 2015.[2]  Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1.  Thereafter, VOA protested the award decision to our Office.  AR, Tab 17, VOA Protest (B-411074), Jan. 26, 2015, at 1-14.  In response, BOP advised our Office that it intended to take corrective action, which was to include a full reevaluation of proposals and a new source selection decision.  Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 3.  BOP’s corrective action further provided that, if necessary, it would cancel the award, conduct another round of discussions, and request final proposal revisions.  Id.  Our Office subsequently dismissed VOA’s protest as academic.[3]  Volunteers of Am. Greater New Orleans, Inc., B-411074, Feb. 26, 2015 (unpublished decision). In July 2015, as part of the corrective action being taken, BOP terminated Bannum’s contract.[4]  COS at 2; AR, Tab 21, Termination for Convenience, July 30, 2015, at 1-2.[5]  In November 2015, the contracting officer sent discussion notices to Bannum and VOA and requested and received a second round of FPRs in December 2015.  AR, Tab 25, DN No.