Prak Industries, LLC (140R1723R0002)

B-422517 Jul 17, 2024 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Prak Industries, LLC (Prak), an Indian Small Business Economic Enterprise (ISBEE) of Camuy, Puerto Rico, protests its elimination from the competition conducted under request for proposals (RFP) No. 140R1723R0002, issued by the Department of the Interior, for janitorial services. The protester argues that the agency misidentified the offeror of its proposal resulting in its unreasonable elimination from the 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 redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Prak Industries, LLC File: B-422517 Date: July 17, 2024 Ruth E. Ganister, Esq., Rosenthal and Ganister, LLC, for the protester. Joshua A. Mullen, Esq., Christopher Lockwood, Esq., and Joshua R. Funderburke, Esq., Womble Bond Dickinson LLP, for North Wind Federal Services, LLC, the intervenor. William B. Blake, Esq., Department of the Interior, for the agency. Raymond Richards, Esq., and John Sorrenti, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency's decision to eliminate the protester from the competition is denied where the agency's decision was reasonably based on the terms of the solicitation and the contents of the protester's proposal. DECISION Prak Industries, LLC (Prak), an Indian Small Business Economic Enterprise (ISBEE) of Camuy, Puerto Rico, protests its elimination from the competition conducted under request for proposals (RFP) No. 140R1723R0002, issued by the Department of the Interior, for janitorial services. The protester argues that the agency misidentified the offeror of its proposal resulting in its unreasonable elimination from the competition. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On September 14, 2023, the agency issued the solicitation as a set-aside for ISBEE concerns under the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12. RFP at 1.[1] The agency sought proposals for comprehensive janitorial services to be performed at the Grand Coulee Dam complex in Grand Coulee, Washington. Id. at 5. The solicitation contemplated the award of a fixedprice contract with a 1year base period and four 1year option periods. Id. Award would be made to the offeror whose proposal “conforming to the solicitation” represented the best value to the government considering two nonprice factors (technical approach and past performance) and price. Id. at 5556, 60. Relevant to the protest, the solicitation incorporated by reference FAR provision 52.2047, System for Award Management (SAM), which required offerors to be registered in SAM.[2] Id. at 57. Proposals were due by November 3. Id. at 1. The agency received two proposals in response to the solicitation, one from Prak and one from North Wind Federal Services (North Wind) of Idaho Falls, Idaho. Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 1.[3] The evaluation results were as follows:   Tech. Approach Past Performance Price Prak Outstanding Exceptional $6,562,276 North Wind Good Satisfactory $6,898,955 Protest, exh. 2, Debriefing at 910.[4] Following the evaluation, the agency concluded that Prak was ineligible for award because the agency considered the proposal to have been submitted by PrakIntegrity Joint Venturea joint venture composed of Prak and Integrity National Corporation of Silver Spring, Marylandand the joint venture was not registered in SAM. Id. at 9; MOL at 2. The agency found that while each member of the joint venture was individually registered in SAM, the joint venture itself was not registered. Protest, exh. 2, Debriefing at 9. As the solicitation incorporated FAR provision 52.2047, which required offerors to be registered in SAM, the agency concluded that the joint venture did not meet the registration requirement and was thus ineligible for award. Id. Ultimately, award was made to North Wind. Id. at 10. After learning the basis for its elimination, Prak timely filed this protest. DISCUSSION Prak challenges its elimination from the competition, arguing that it, Prak Industries, LLC, was the offeror that submitted the proposal and not the joint venture. Accordingly, Prak asserts that it was therefore eligible to receive award because Prak Industries, LLC was registered in SAM, and that the joint venture did not need to be registered in SAM because it was not the actual offeror. Protest at 23; Comments at 3. The agency argues that based on the contents of the proposal, PrakIntegrity Joint Venture was the offeror, and because the joint venture was not registered in SAM, the proposal was reasonably eliminated from the competition. MOL at 5.