Taylor Made Transportation Services, Inc.

B-416786.2 Dec 17, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights RTW Management, a small business of Scottsdale, Arizona, protests the corrective action proposed by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), in response to a protest by Taylor Made Transportation Services, Inc. (Taylor Made), a small business of Baltimore, Maryland, against the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C24518R0207, issued by the VA for shuttle transportation services in support of the VA's Maryland Health Care System. RTW argues that the agency's decision to take corrective action is unreasonable. 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:  RTW Management File:  B-416786.2 Date:  December 17, 2018 William M. Weisberg, Esq., Law Offices of William Weisberg, for the protester. Donald C. Mobly, Esq., Deborah K. Morrell, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Michael P. Grogan, Esq., and Amy B. Pereira, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest of an agency’s decision to take corrective action is denied where the agency reasonably concluded that corrective action was necessary to address flaws in the solicitation’s evaluation criteria and ensure fair and impartial competition. DECISION RTW Management, a small business of Scottsdale, Arizona, protests the corrective action proposed by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), in response to a protest by Taylor Made Transportation Services, Inc. (Taylor Made), a small business of Baltimore, Maryland, against the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. 36C24518R0207, issued by the VA for shuttle transportation services in support of the VA’s Maryland Health Care System.  RTW argues that the agency’s decision to take corrective action is unreasonable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP, issued on August 3, 2018, as a small business set-aside, contemplates the award of a fixed-price contract for a 1-year base period and four 1-year option periods.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 3, RFP at 1.  The solicitation was issued using the commercial item procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12.  RFP at 20.  The RFP provides two different bases of award.  First, section E.10 of the RFP states that award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the government, considering price, technical capability, and past performance, where technical capability and past performance, when combined, are approximately equal to price.  RFP at 45.  Section E.11, on the other hand, provides that “award will be made to the responsible offeror who submits an acceptable proposal, as determined by a technical evaluation, and has [the] lowest price for satisfactory completion of all contract requirements.”  RFP at 45.  The closing date for the receipt of proposals was August 22.  RFP at 1.  The agency received timely proposals from [DELETED], including RTW.  AR, Tab 2, Contracting Officer’s Statement at 1. Prior to award, on August 28, Taylor Made filed an agency-level protest with the VA, which the agency denied on August 30.  Id.  Taylor Made filed a protest with our Office on September 7, challenging the reasonableness of the RFP’s submission deadline, and alleging that the agency failed to timely provide Taylor Made with information about the publication of the RFP.  AR, Tab 5, Notice of Corrective Action at 1.  On  September 13, the agency notified our Office that it intended to take corrective action by amending and re-posting the solicitation.  Id.  On September 21, our Office dismissed Taylor Made’s protest as academic.  Taylor Made Transp. Serv., Inc., B-416786,  Sept. 21, 2018 (unpublished decision).  On September 14, RTW filed this protest with our Office, challenging the reasonableness of the agency’s proposed corrective action. DISCUSSION In its protest, RTW argues that the agency’s proposed corrective action is unreasonable.  Protest at 1.  The protester contends that given the timing of Taylor Made’s protest--that is, after proposals had been submitted, but before the agency made an award decision--such a protest must have been either untimely or premature.  As such, the protester argues, the agency’s proposed corrective action in response to such a protest is unreasonable, and is designed to benefit Taylor Made.  Id.  The protester also asserts that because no offeror, aside from Taylor Made, objected to the terms of the solicitation, the RFP could not have contained an impropriety that the agency was required to correct.  Id.