Butt Construction Company, Inc. (W912QR20B0020)

B-419156.2 Jan 26, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Butt Construction Company, Inc., of Dayton, Ohio, a small business, protests the award of a contract to R.J. Runge Company, Inc., of Port Clinton, Ohio, also a small business, under invitation for bids (IFB) No. W912QR-20-B-0020, issued by the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, for construction of an exterior elevator for the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center in Lima, Ohio. Butt argues that the Army should have rejected Runge's bid as nonresponsive. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Butt Construction Company, Inc. File:  B-419156.2 Date:  January 26, 2021 Rachel Butt, for the protester. Nora E. Luftus, Esq., Frantz Ward LLP, for R.J. Runge Company, Inc., the intervenor. Christopher Lambert, Esq., and Tarrah M. Beavin, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Paul N. Wengert, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency improperly rescinded the rejection of competitor’s bid as nonresponsive is denied where agency properly recognized that joint certification program registration was a matter of responsibility that could be corrected after bid opening. DECISION   Butt Construction Company, Inc., of Dayton, Ohio, a small business, protests the award of a contract to R.J. Runge Company, Inc., of Port Clinton, Ohio, also a small business, under invitation for bids (IFB) No. W912QR-20-B-0020, issued by the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, for construction of an exterior elevator for the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center in Lima, Ohio.  Butt argues that the Army should have rejected Runge’s bid as nonresponsive.  We deny the protest.  BACKGROUND The IFB, issued July 15, 2020, sought bids to perform construction services.  The terms of the original IFB did not designate the competition as being set aside for small businesses; an amendment added the set-aside requirement.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 5, IFB amend. 1 at 1.  As relevant to the protest, among the terms of the synopsis accompanying the IFB was the following: At the time of bid submission, offerors are required to be registered in the Joint Certification Program (JCP) run by DLIS [Defense Logistics Agency, Logistics Information Services] and must also submit verification that the company is US owned and personnel are US Citizens in order to be considered responsive for this Invitation for Bid (IFB) contract award.  JCP information can be found at http://www.dlis.dla.mil/jcp. . . .  AR, Tab 4, Synopsis of Solicitation at 3.  The Army subsequently issued three amendments to the IFB; amendment 3 added the following to the IFB itself: NOTE:  At the time of bid submission, offerors are required to be registered in the Joint Certification Program (JCP) run by DLIS and must also submit verification that the company is US owned and personnel are US Citizens in order to be considered responsive for this Invitation for Bid (IFB) contract award.  JCP information can be found at https://www.dla.mil/HQ/LogisticisOperations/Services/JCP.aspx. . . . AR, Tab 7, IFB amend. 3 at 2.  The Army received five bids.  Runge’s was the lowest-priced at $2.07 million, while Butt submitted the third-lowest bid at $2.23 million.  AR, Tab 8, Bid Opening Results Sheet at 1.  Runge’s bid included a certification form, which the firm had completed and signed, affirming that the firm was owned and controlled by, and that all personnel on the project were also required to be, United States citizens.  AR, Tab 9, Bid Submitted by Runge, at final (unnumbered) page.[1]  After bid opening, the Army contract specialist contacted Runge to state that the firm’s JCP registration appeared to have been canceled and to request confirmation or proof that an application had been resubmitted by the firm.  AR, Tab 12, exh. C, Email from Contract Specialist to Runge (Sept. 9, 2020), at 1.  Runge responded that it had applied to have its JCP registration reactivated before the bid opening, and enclosed a copy of the request.  AR, Tab 12, exh. D, Email from Runge to Contract Specialist (Sept. 9, 2020), at 1-2 (transmittal email and DD Form 2345). After reviewing Runge’s submission, the contract specialist informed Runge that its bid had been rejected because it did not have a “currently active” JCP registration, and therefore the bid did not conform to the IFB requirements.[2]  AR, Tab 12, exh. E, Email from Contract Specialist to Runge (Sept. 10, 2020), at 1.  On September 11, Runge forwarded to the contract specialist a JCP registration approval letter that the firm had received from the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA).  AR, Tab 12, exh. F, Email from Runge to Contract Specialist to (Sept. 11, 2020), at 1.