Jeremy L. Dillon
WC Monitor
7/10/2015
The Government Accountability Office released this week its protest denial decision in the Department of Energy’s most recent decision to award the support services contract for the Office of Legacy Management to Navarro Research and Engineering. Portage and a team of Wastren Advantage-Stoller had each filed challenges over DOE’s decision in late January to name Navarro the winner of the new contract, valued at approximately $250 million. In the decision, GAO found that the Department did not err in considering past performance outside of that listed in the companies’ proposals as well as not erring in the evaluation of the bids. “We find that the agency’s consideration of this past performance information was reasonable,” the decision said. “The RFP informed offerors that past performance ‘[r]eferences other than those identified by the Offeror may be contacted by the Government with the information received used in evaluation.’ Therefore, offerors were on notice that the agency could consider past performance information not found in the firm’s proposal.”
The other area of protest revolved around the definition of a “major subcontractor,” and how it should be involved in the evaluation, mainly whether SAIC qualifies as a Navarro major subcontractor. Navarro included SAIC as a major subcontractor in its bid, but the protesters alleged that under the guidelines of the RFP, SAIC did not qualify due to the percent amount of the contract that SAIC would work on. GAO, however, found that DOE did not err in allowing the company as a major subcontractor. “We find that the agency’s approach to assessing SAIC’s subcontracting role was reasonable and not inconsistent with the RFP,” the decision said. “Although the protesters disagree with the agency’s approach, they have not shown the approach to be unreasonable. In particular, we see no basis to conclude, as Portage urges, that the agency’s focus on labor costs was unreasonable because it was inconsistent with an instruction on completing cost exhibits, directing offerors “to address all elements of cost applicable to the proposed effort.”
The GAO’s decision is the latest twist in DOE’s lengthy procurement for the new Legacy Management support services contract, which has been set aside for small businesses and attracted heavy industry interest. In April 2013, DOE chose Portage out of eight bids as the winner of the new contract. That decision was met with protests to the GAO by the WAI team and Navarro. In response, DOE chose to take corrective action and re-evaluate all eight bids, leading to a decision in early 2014 to again select Portage as the winner of the follow-on contract. The WAI team and Navarro again filed protests with the GAO over DOE’s decision, and in the spring of 2014, the GAO sustained Navarro’s protest but denied WAI-Stoller’s. The GAO’s decision led DOE to again re-evaluate the bids submitted, and in late January, the Department shifted course and chose Navarro as the winner of the follow-on contract.
It remains unclear if the two companies will seek any additional recourses to further contest Navarro’s win. Both parties declined to comment this week.
The incumbent Legacy Management support contractor is Stoller (now known as Stoller Newport News Nuclear). Stoller’s contract was initially set to expire in September 2012, and the company had been unable to lead a bid of its own for the new contract because it no longer met the size standard DOE used for the procurement, leading it instead to team with WAI. Due to the time it has taken to complete the award of the new contract, though, Stoller has received multiple extensions to its contract. Most recently, DOE moved in March to again extend Stoller’s contract, this time until the end of September 2015.
