APC DB JV, LLC (W9126G20R0051)

B-419327 Jan 15, 2021 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights McGoldrick Construction Services Corporation, a small business of San Antonio, Texas, challenges the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. W9126G20R0051, issued by the Department of the Army, United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for vertical construction services. The protester contends that the solicitation is an inappropriate consolidation of several existing requirements, and is additionally unduly restrictive of competition. 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 version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of:  McGoldrick Construction Services Corporation File:  B-419327 Date:  February 9, 2021 Douglas L. Patin, Esq., Aron C. Beezley, Esq., and Lisa A. Markman, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for the protester. Anna Kurtz, Esq., and Brian Payton, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Michael Willems, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest challenging the agency’s determination that consolidating its requirements was necessary and justified is denied where the agency concluded that the consolidation would result in benefits critical to the agency’s mission success. 2.  Protest challenging solicitation provisions as unduly restrictive of competition is denied where the provisions are reasonably related to the agency’s requirements. DECISION   McGoldrick Construction Services Corporation, a small business of San Antonio, Texas, challenges the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. W9126G20R0051, issued by the Department of the Army, United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for vertical construction services.  The protester contends that the solicitation is an inappropriate consolidation of several existing requirements, and is additionally unduly restrictive of competition. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP is a 100 percent small business set-aside, and contemplates the award of five indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts for fixed-price vertical construction in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, and New Mexico.  Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1-2.  Previously, USACE maintained several separate contract vehicles for vertical construction in these states, and this RFP is one of several solicitations that the agency is pursuing to consolidate those previously separate requirements.[1]  Agency Report (AR), Tab 15, Consolidation Memorandum at 5.  For example, prior to the issuance of this solicitation, the agency procured its vertical construction requirements, in part, through four multiple-award IDIQ contracts, with a total of 23 awardees.  Id.  Because the current RFP consolidates multiple construction requirements at differing locations, the agency conducted market research and documented its determination that the consolidation was necessary and justified in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 7.107-2.  Id. at 1 (citing FAR 2.101 and 7.107-2(a)).  Specifically, the agency conducted market research by issuing two sources sought notices and conducting searches of relevant small business databases.  Id. at 7-10.  Relevant to this protest, the agency’s market research, in total, found hundreds of small businesses with single project bonding capacity in excess of $8 million.  Id.  Focusing on firms capable of performing higher dollar value projects from that initial pool, the market research found 106 potentially capable small businesses with an average single project bonding capacity of $30 million and an average aggregate bonding capacity of $136 million.  AR, Tab 15, Consolidation Memorandum at 7-10.On the basis of this market research and the relevant small business size standard of $39.5 million, the agency concluded that projects with expected values below $30 million would be suitable to be set aside for small business concerns.  Id. The agency then prepared a written memorandum documenting the agency’s market research, its rationale for consolidating these requirements, and the agency’s determination and findings that the consolidation was necessary and justified.  See Id. generally.  This memorandum included a discussion of alternative contracting approaches and the impact of contract consolidation on small businesses.  Id. at 11-18.  The agency considered three alternatives:  (1) procuring each construction project as a separate contract; (2) issuing four multiple award IDIQs covering smaller geographic regions; and (3) issuing a single IDIQ covering the entire region.  Id.