Global Engineering Services, LLC (36C78623B0011)

B-421866 Oct 02, 2023 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Global Engineering Services, LLC (Global), a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) of Midvale, Utah, protests the award of a contract to SGC Services 2, LLC (SGC), a small business of Gresham, Oregon, under invitation for bids (IFB) No. 36C78623B0011, issued by the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA), for construction services at the Cedar City National Cemetery in Cedar City, Utah. The protester contends the agency's decision to award a contract, rather than cancel the IFB and resolicit bids, was unreasonable. We dismiss 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: Global Engineering Services, LLC File: B-421866 Date: October 2, 2023 Jonathan D. Perrone, Esq., and Hay Kyung Chang Lanteigne, Esq., Whitcomb, Selinsky, P.C., for the protester. Marcia A. McCree, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Michael P. Grogan, Esq., and Evan D. Wesser, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that the agency should be prevented from proceeding with award--based on the contracting officer’s prior representation that the protester’s failure to extend its bid acceptance period would result in the agency cancelling and resoliciting for its requirement‑-is dismissed where the protester is not an interested party to challenge the award, and our Office lacks the jurisdiction to consider the protester’s estoppel argument. DECISION Global Engineering Services, LLC (Global), a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) of Midvale, Utah, protests the award of a contract to SGC Services 2, LLC (SGC), a small business of Gresham, Oregon, under invitation for bids (IFB) No. 36C78623B0011, issued by the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA), for construction services at the Cedar City National Cemetery in Cedar City, Utah. The protester contends the agency’s decision to award a contract, rather than cancel the IFB and resolicit bids, was unreasonable. We dismiss the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the IFB on March 19, 2023, as a small business set-aside, pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 14. Agency Report (AR), Tab 8, attach. S02, IFB at 1.[1] The solicitation contemplated the award of a single, fixed-price contract, for construction services at the Cedar City National Cemetery in Cedar City, Utah. IFB at 1. Specifically, the contractor would provide “all transportation, tools, materials, components, permits, license, labor and supervision to completely prepare site for building operations, including demolition and removal of existing structures, and furnish labor, materials, equipment, and services and perform and complete all work” identified in the IFB’s drawings and specifications. Id. The agency received multiple bids by the April 27 submission deadline. COS at 1. After the VA completed its evaluation, but before making award, the 60-day bid acceptance period specified in the solicitation expired. Id. at 2; see IFB at 1; see also AR, Tab 10, attach. S10, Global’s Bid at 5 (providing that Global’s bid could be accepted by the government within 60 days of the bid due date). On June 30, days after the 60-day period expired, the contracting officer asked Global to confirm that its “pricing is still valid[,]” to which the protester explained it would have to communicate with its subcontrators before confirming its original price. AR, Tab 20, attach. 7, Email Exchanges at 2. On July 7, the contracting officer explained to Global that the VA “may not have additional funds available to make award” to Global if its bid price increased. Id., attach. 6 at 1. Following two additional attempts by the VA to ask whether Global could confirm its original bid price, on July 12, Global submitted a revised bid, which included an approximately 2 percent price increase. Id., attach 13 at 1. On July 13, the contracting officer replied to Global, explaining that “[a]fter researching the current issue, I do not believe we will legally be able to move forward with the award if your bid amount changes.” Protest, exh. 1, Email Exchanges at 1. That same day, by separate email, the contracting officer also explained that if Global was able to honor its original bid amount, the agency could finalize the award, otherwise, “we will be required to cancel the solicitation and re-solicit.” Id. By telephone on July 14, the contracting officer explained that if Global did not honor its original bid price, the agency would either award to the next lowest bidder or cancel the IFB and resolicit bids.