Courts, Boards, & GAO

Trending Now
Supreme Court Holds that Federal Law Does Not Preempt State Tort Claims When the Contractor’s Own Negligence Causes Injuries • You Can’t Blame the Government for Weather You Could Have Predicted • COFC Holds that USAID Contractors Properly Pleaded Breach of Contract by Improper Mass Termination in Bad Faith/Abuse of Discretion • Bid Protests in Maine • Army Awards $2.7B Contract for Dark Eagle Hypersonic Weapon

Challenges to Contracts for Maintenance of Georgia Military Base Come Up Short; HCR Construction, Inc.; Southern Aire Contracting, Inc., GAO B-418070.4, B-418070.5

Protest challenging the agency's evaluation of awardees’ technical proposals is denied. The protesters alleged that awardees did not have general contractor licenses required by the solicitation. But GAO found that any license requirement was a performance requirement, so offerors did not have to be licensed prior to award. The protesters also alleged that another offeror did not have an office within 150 miles of the contract site as required by the solicitation. This awardee, however, had a regional office within 150 miles.

The Army issued a solicitation seeking to award multiple IDIQ contracts for maintenance services at Fort Benning, Georgia on a lowest-price, technically acceptable basis. The Army made award to the five lowest-priced, technically acceptable proposals. HCR Construction, Inc. and Southern Aire Contracting, Inc. which had the sixth and seventh lowest-priced proposals, protested.

HCR and Southern Aire claimed that two of the awardees did not possess current Georgia general contractor licenses and thus were technically unacceptable. GAO noted that solicitation provisions that require a contractor to obtain all necessary licenses are performance requirements that only need to be satisfied during contract performance, not prior to award. Here, the solicitation only required the contractor to comply with all applicable codes, laws, and requirement while performing the work. It did not require evidence of licenses to be submitted as part of offerors’ proposals.

HCR also claimed that one of awardee’s proposals was unacceptable because they did not have an office location within 150 miles of Fort Benning as required by the solicitation. But the awardee in question had stated in its proposal that it had a regional office in Dothan, Alabama, which was within 150 miles of Fort Benning. The Army confirmed that the awardee had an office in Dothan, Alabama. There was nothing in the record to suggest that it was unreasonable for the Army to rely on this information.

HCR is represented by Kevin P. Mullen and Lyle F. Hedgecock of Morrison & Foerster LLC. Southern Aire is represented by Benjamin S. Lowenthal of Hendricks Phillips Salzman & Siegel PC. The agency is represented by Major Mark T. Robinson, Robert B. Neill, and Scott N. Flesch of the Army. GAO attorneys Louis A. Chiarella and Peter H. Tran participated in the preparation of the decision.

Get daily insights on bid protests, CDA claims, and contract litigation that shape the GovCon landscape with our Protests & Claims newsletter, delivering up-to-the-minute intelligence Monday–Saturday — Subscribe here.