LOGMET LLC (FA4897-22-R-0001)

B-420507 May 06, 2022 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights LOGMET LLC, of Round Rock, Texas, challenges the terms of the solicitation under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA4897-22-R-0001, issued by the Department of the Air Force for flight operations training and F-15 aircraft maintenance to support the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) at Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho. The protester argues that the agency improperly bundled two requirements and that several solicitation provisions are unduly restrictive of competition. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: LOGMET LLC File: B-420507 Date: May 6, 2022 Wayne Rankin, LOGMET LLC, for the protester. Erika Whelan Retta, Esq., Isabelle P. Cutting, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Emily R. O’Hara, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest alleging agency improperly bundled requirements in violation of the Small Business Act is denied where the record shows that the requirements do not meet the definitional prerequisites of the bundling restrictions of the Act, i.e., the requirements were not previously performed under two separate, smaller contracts. 2. Protest challenging terms of the solicitation as unduly restrictive of competition is denied where the solicitation’s requirements are reasonably necessary to meet the agency’s needs. DECISION LOGMET LLC, of Round Rock, Texas, challenges the terms of the solicitation under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA4897-22-R-0001, issued by the Department of the Air Force for flight operations training and F-15 aircraft maintenance to support the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) at Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho. The protester argues that the agency improperly bundled two requirements and that several solicitation provisions are unduly restrictive of competition. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The solicitation, issued on January 27, 2022, pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15, contemplates the award of a fixed‑price contract for one base year and four option years. Agency Report (AR), Tab 32, RFP at 1, 3-6[1]; AR, Tab 2, Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 1-2. The Air Force provides training support to the RSAF through a Foreign Military Sales program known as Peace Carvin. MOL at 1. The Air Force describes Peace Carvin as a program that ensures “a strong U.S. relationship with Singapore, a critical partner in the region, while helping Singapore project airpower into the next generation.” AR, Tab 1, Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 2. Generally, the solicitation seeks a contractor to provide aircraft maintenance and flight operations training to RSAF personnel on the F-15 Eagle aircraft operated by the U.S. Air Force and the F-15 variant (F-15SG) operated by the RSAF. Id. at 1-2; RFP at 100. The agency states that the RSAF Aircraft Operations and Maintenance Support contract, awarded in 2018, is currently in its third iteration. COS at 3-4. The first iteration of the contract was issued in 2008 as a competitive set-aside under the Small Business Administration’s 8(a) Business Development program.[2] COS at 2-3. The current solicitation seeks to award the fourth iteration of the contract.[3] Id. at 4. The RFP advised offerors that award would be made using a best-value tradeoff process based on the following four evaluation factors: technical, past performance, small business participation, and price. RFP at 88-93. Proposals would first be evaluated for technical acceptability based on three technical subfactors (recruitment/retention, quality management, and prerequisite documentation), which would be assessed on an acceptable/unacceptable basis. Id. at 88-90. For those proposals found to be technically acceptable (and to have an acceptable small business participation submission), tradeoffs could be made between past performance and price, with past performance being significantly more important than price. Id. On February 5, 2022, prior to the due date for submission of proposals, the protester filed this protest with our Office challenging the terms of the solicitation. DISCUSSION LOGMET challenges the terms of the solicitation, arguing that the agency improperly bundled two requirements and that several terms are unduly restrictive of competition. Protest at 20-26. We address these allegations in turn.[4] Bundling The protester first argues that the agency improperly bundled requirements in the solicitation, and thus violated the Small Business Act.[5] Id. at 26 (citing and referencing definitions found in 15 U.S.C. § 632(o)(2)).