Piraeus International, Inc. (19BE1021Q5000)

B-420363.3 Apr 11, 2022 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Piraeus International, Inc., of Baltimore, Maryland, requests that our Office recommend that the Department of State (DOS) reimburse its reasonable costs of filing and pursuing its protest (B-420363, B-420363.2) challenging the award of a contract to Export 220Volt Inc., of Houston, Texas, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 19BE1021Q5000, which was issued by DOS for household appliances. Piraeus argues that the agency unduly delayed taking corrective action in response to what the requester contends were clearly meritorious challenges to the agency's evaluation of Export 220's technical quotation, the evaluation of the awardee's price, and the terms of the solicitation. We grant in part and deny in part the request. 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: Piraeus International, Inc.--Costs File: B-420363.3 Date: April 11, 2022 Holly A. Roth, Esq., Gregory S. Jacobs, Esq., Erin L. Felix, Esq., Daniel H. Petkoff, Esq., and Christopher A. Stevens, Esq., Polsinelli PC, for the requester. Kathleen D. Martin, Esq., Department of State, for the agency. Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., and John Sorrenti, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Request that GAO recommend reimbursement of protest costs is granted where the initial protest arguments challenging the evaluation of the technical acceptability of the awardee’s quotation were clearly meritorious because a reasonable inquiry by the agency would have revealed facts showing the absence of a defensible legal position, and where the agency unduly delayed taking corrective action. 2. Request that GAO recommend reimbursement of protest costs is denied where the requester’s arguments that the solicitation required the agency to evaluate price realism were not clearly meritorious. 3. Request that GAO recommend reimbursement of protest costs is denied where the requester’s arguments challenging the terms of the solicitation were dismissed as untimely. The fact that the agency subsequently took corrective action that, in effect, granted the relief sought by the requester, does not provide a basis for our Office to recommend reimbursement of costs. DECISION Piraeus International, Inc., of Baltimore, Maryland, requests that our Office recommend that the Department of State (DOS) reimburse its reasonable costs of filing and pursuing its protest (B-420363, B-420363.2) challenging the award of a contract to Export 220Volt Inc., of Houston, Texas, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 19BE1021Q5000, which was issued by DOS for household appliances. Piraeus argues that the agency unduly delayed taking corrective action in response to what the requester contends were clearly meritorious challenges to the agency’s evaluation of Export 220’s technical quotation, the evaluation of the awardee’s price, and the terms of the solicitation. We grant in part and deny in part the request. BACKGROUND DOS’s European Logistical Support Office maintains an Expedited Logistics Program (ELP), through which various commercial items are stored for rapid deployment to various posts in Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1. The agency issued the solicitation on October 12, 2021, seeking quotations to provide 220volt/50hertz household electrical appliances to replenish depleted stocks of ELP inventory.[1] Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, RFQ at 3. The agency issued the solicitation through the Unison Marketplace website, and required vendors to submit quotations through that website.[2] COS at 1. The solicitation was set aside for small businesses and was issued under the commercial item and simplified acquisition procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) parts 12 and 13. COS at 2; AR, Tab 2, Buy Details Document at 1‑2. The solicitation anticipated the award of a fixed-price contract. RFQ at 3. The RFQ included FAR provision 52.212-2(a), Evaluation-Commercial Items, but did not specify the basis upon which quotations would be evaluated. Id. at 32. The evaluation criteria and basis for award were identified in the Unison Buy Details document, which advised that the agency would “select for award the one responsible quote which conforms to the Bidding Requirements and Buy Terms in the auction, proposes a price that is fair and reasonable, and provides the Lowest Priced, Technically Acceptable (LPTA) quote meeting the specifications of the requirement.” AR, Tab 2, Buy Details Document, at 2. The solicitation identified eight brand-name household appliances, and specified quantities for each product. Id.