MPC Containment Systems, LLC

B-416188.2 Jul 23, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights MPC Containment Systems, LLC, of Chicago, Illinois, protests the award of a contract to North American Fuel Tanks, Inc. (NAFTI), of Mansfield, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. SPRDL1-16-R-0348, issued by the Department of Defense, Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), for collapsible fuel storage tanks. The contract was awarded after the Small Business Administration (SBA) issued a Certificate of Competency (COC) to NAFTI. MPC contends that SBA failed to consider vital information bearing on NAFTI's responsibility in issuing the COC. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  MPC Containment Systems, LLC File:  B-416188.2 Date:  July 23, 2018 Benjamin Beiler, for the protester. Eric C. Selke, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency, and Meagan K. Guerzon, Esq., Small Business Administration, for the agencies. Pedro E. Briones, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that the Small Business Administration (SBA) failed to consider vital information bearing on the awardee’s responsibility in issuing a certificate of competency is denied where the allegedly vital information does not concern the awardee’s compliance with definitive responsibility criteria and where there is no evidence that the procuring agency provided incorrect information, or withheld information, from the SBA. DECISION MPC Containment Systems, LLC, of Chicago, Illinois, protests the award of a contract to North American Fuel Tanks, Inc. (NAFTI), of Mansfield, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. SPRDL1‑16‑R‑0348, issued by the Department of Defense, Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), for collapsible fuel storage tanks.  The contract was awarded after the Small Business Administration (SBA) issued a Certificate of Competency (COC) to NAFTI.  MPC contends that SBA failed to consider vital information bearing on NAFTI’s responsibility in issuing the COC. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP, which was set aside for small businesses, was issued on February 24, 2017, pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15 to procure collapsible fuel tank assemblies (or fuel bladders) for the U.S. Army, Tank-automotive & Armaments Command (TACOM).  Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, RFP, at 1‑2, 38, 59‑61, 66; DLA Contracting Officer’s Statement & Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) at 1.[1]  The solicitation provided for the award of up to two fixed‑priced, 5‑year indefinite‑delivery, indefinite‑quantity (IDIQ) contracts based on lowest evaluated price.[2]  RFP at 7, 69, 96, 103‑5.  Offerors were to propose fixed prices for each performance period for specified numbers of fuel bladders in three capacities (3,000, 20,000, and 50,000 gallon), as well as a fixed price for first article testing (FAT) of each size of fuel bladder.  See id., Sched., at 8‑37.  If an offeror requested, and DLA approved, a FAT waiver for any size fuel bladder, then the proposed price for the corresponding FAT contract line item number would be deducted from the offeror’s total evaluated price.[3]  RFP at 103. DLA received proposals from five offerors by the September 22 deadline, including from NAFTI, GTA, and MPC, whose proposals were evaluated by the contracting officer as follows:   NAFTI GTA MPC Total Evaluated Price $30,028,303 $36,213,230 $41,283,825 Id. at 6; COS/MOL at 2; see AR, Tab 5, Abstract of Offers (Abstract), at 1‑5; Tab 10, CO’s Decl., ¶ 3; DLA Email to Parties, July 13, 2018.  Among the five offerors, NAFTI, GTA, and MPC had the lowest, second‑lowest, and third‑lowest total evaluated prices, respectively.  See Abstract.  NAFTI was also granted a partial FAT waiver for its 3,000 gallon fuel bladder based on it having successfully passed more rigorous testing by the Department of the Air Force.  AR, Tab 3, NAFTI Contract, at 2; see Tab 6, Pre‑Award Survey (Survey), at 5‑6. As part of her responsibility determination, the contracting officer requested a pre‑award survey of NAFTI by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA).  CO’s Decl. ¶ 3.  Three DCMA individuals conducted the survey:  an industrial specialist who performed an on‑site visit of NAFTI’s facilities to assess the contractor’s technical and production capabilities; a quality assurance specialist who performed a separate on‑site visit to assess NAFTI’s quality assurance program and packaging capability; and a financial analyst who performed a financial capability survey.  Survey at 1‑39. DCMA recommended against contract award because it determined NAFTI was not financially capable of performing the contract.  Id. at 1‑3.  Based on the results of its financial audit, DCMA concluded that the contractor currently lacked the financial resources, or the ability to obtain them, to fund a 5‑year, $30 million contract.  Id.