Hanford Tank Closure Company, LLC (89303319REM000044)

B-418778.9 Nov 16, 2020 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Hanford Tank Closure Company, LLC (HTCC), of Richland, Washington, requests our recommendation that the Department of Energy (DOE) reimburse HTCC for the costs HTCC incurred in filing and pursuing protests challenging the agency's award of a contract to Hanford Works Restoration, LLC (HWR) pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. 89033319REM000044. The solicitation sought proposals to perform various activities associated with environmental remediation at DOE's Hanford site. We deny the request. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. The entire decision has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of:  Hanford Tank Closure Company, LLC -- Costs File:  B-418778.9 Date:  November 16, 2020 Jason A. Carey, Esq., J. Hunter Bennett, Esq., Brooke G. Stanley, Esq., and Nick Baer, Esq., Covington & Burling, LLP, for the protester. James J. Jurich, Esq., Marianna Lvovsky, Esq., Nicholas M. Bidwell, Esq., Stephanie J. Villalta, Esq., and Michael O’Hagan, Esq., Department of Energy, for the agency. Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest allegations are not clearly meritorious where additional record development would be required to assess the validity of the protester’s allegations; accordingly, the protester’s request that we recommend reimbursement of protest costs following agency corrective action is denied. DECISION   Hanford Tank Closure Company, LLC (HTCC), of Richland, Washington, requests our recommendation that the Department of Energy (DOE) reimburse HTCC for the costs HTCC incurred in filing and pursuing protests challenging the agency’s award of a contract to Hanford Works Restoration, LLC (HWR) pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. 89033319REM000044.  The solicitation sought proposals to perform various activities associated with environmental remediation at DOE’s Hanford site.[1]  We deny the request. BACKGROUND The agency began planning for this procurement by conducting site tours and “one-on-one information exchange sessions” with potential offerors in March 2016.  COS/MOL, July 6, 2016, at 6.  On January 18, 2019, the agency issued a draft RFP seeking industry comments and feedback.  Id. at 6-7. The RFP was issued on February 14, 2019, seeking proposals for a single-award indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract under which subsequent task orders will be issued.[2]  While a primary objective of the procurement is to remediate and close a significant portion of Hanford’s 177 waste storage tanks, the agency describes the overall scope of the IDIQ contract as “extremely broad,” including activities associated with all of the following:  contract transition, tank closure mission integration and optimization; tank farms base operations; single-shell tank remediation and closure; waste receiver facilities; supplemental treatment capability; tank waste operations center; low-activity waste pretreatment system; analytical laboratory support; core functions; and usage-based services for other Hanford contractors.  Id. at 8-9.  Following completion of the transition period, the contractor and the agency will negotiate task orders with “discrete end states.”[3]  Id. at 5. The solicitation provided for award on the basis of a best-value tradeoff and established the following evaluation factors:  key personnel, technical/management approach, past performance, and cost/fee.  Agency Report (AR) Tab A.1, RFP at 793.  For purposes of evaluation, proposals were required to address three task orders regarding:  (1) transition; (2) single-shell tank retrieval and closure; and (3) base operations.  On or before the March 18, 2019 closing date, proposals were submitted by three offerors, including HTCC and HWR.[4]  Thereafter, the proposals were evaluated; discussions were not conducted.  COS/MOL at 13-14.  On May 12, the contracting officer, who was also the source selection authority, selected HWR for award. On May 27, HTCC filed its initial protest, asserting that HWR created the appearance of impropriety and/or obtained an unfair competitive advantage by hiring the former manager of DOE’s Richland Office (RL) to assist in preparing HWR’s proposal.  In this context, HTCC asserts that the former manager began to work on HWR’s proposal shortly after retiring from DOE in February 2019.  HTCC’s initial protest also challenged the agency’s evaluation of proposals under the past performance evaluation factor.  On June 1, HTCC filed its first supplemental protest, adding challenges to the agency’s evaluation of proposals with regard to the technical/management and cost/fee evaluation factors.  On June 15 (prior to the due date for submission of an agency report) DOE produced a substa...