Office Design Group

B-415411 Jan 03, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Office Design Group (ODG), a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) concern of Irvine, California, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. VA701-17-R-0094, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for furniture and installation-related services at the VA's Puget Sound Mental Health and Research Building in Seattle, Washington. The protester alleges that an amendment to the RFP created an ambiguity and that the time given to respond to the solicitation was unreasonably short. We sustain the protest. We sustain the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Office Design Group File:  B-415411 Date:  January 3, 2018 Joseph A. Whitcomb, Esq., Whitcomb, Selinsky, McAuliffe, PC, for the protester. Frank V. DiNicola, Esq., and Tobias D. Hunziker, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Gabriel D. Soll, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest is timely when filed within 10 days of resolution of an agency-level protest and raises the same issue. 2.  Protest alleging an ambiguity in a solicitation is sustained where the removal of a mandatory contract clause created two reasonable interpretations concerning whether the procurement was set aside for competition among service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. DECISION Office Design Group (ODG), a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) concern of Irvine, California, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. VA701-17-R-0094, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for furniture and installation-related services at the VA’s Puget Sound Mental Health and Research Building in Seattle, Washington.  The protester alleges that an amendment to the RFP created an ambiguity and that the time given to respond to the solicitation was unreasonably short. We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND On July 13, 2017, the VA posted a pre-solicitation notice to the FedBizOps website notifying prospective offerors of its intent to solicit the required items and services as a total SDVOSB set-aside.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 9, VA701-17-R-0094_2 pre-solicitation, at 2.  With that notice, the agency provided draft requirements and drawings and advised potential offerors to expect a truncated response time when the solicitation was posted.  Id. at 2.  On September 12, 2017, the VA issued the RFP as an SDVOSB set-aside, pursuant to the commercial item acquisition and negotiated procurement procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) parts 12 and 15.  RFP at 1.  The RFP contemplated the award of a single fixed-price contract.  Id. at 44. The RFP indicated in block 10 of the standard form (SF) 1449 that it was set aside for SDVOSBs, and included several clauses and provisions relating to the set-aside status.  As required by Veterans Affairs Acquisition Regulation (VAAR) § 819.7009, the RFP included VAAR clause 852.219-10, VA Notice of Total Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Set-Aside.  Id. at 1, 18.  The solicitation also advised offerors that any resulting contract would include that clause as well.  Id. at 5.  In prescribing the use of this clause, VAAR § 819.7009 states, “[t]he contracting officer shall insert VAAR clause 852.219-10, Notice of Total Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Set-Aside. . . in solicitations and contracts for acquisitions under this subpart.”  48 C.F.R. § 819.7009. The VAAR clause defines which businesses can qualify as an SDVOSB concern and provides the following general guidance regarding a limitation on subcontractors: (c) Agreement.  A service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern agrees that in the performance of the contract, the concern will comply with the limitation on subcontracting requirements in 13 C.F.R. § 125.6. 48 C.F.R. § 852.219-10(c).  13 C.F.R. § 125.6, in turn, provides as follows with regard to services contracts: (1) In the case of a contract for services (except construction), [an SDVOSB] will not pay more than 50% of the amount paid by the government to it to firms that are not similarly situated.  Any work that a similarly situated subcontractor further subcontracts will count towards the 50% subcontract amount that cannot be exceeded. The RFP included the VAAR clause and required potential offerors to demonstrate in their proposals how the SDVOSB subcontracting limitation above would be met during performance.  RFP at 18, 40.  This instruction reflected the VAAR clause requirement that at least 50 percent of the cost of personnel for performance of services under the resulting contract be spent on employees of the SDVOSB awardee, or another eligible SDVOSB concern.  Id.