Protests alleging that the agency had conducted an improper reprocurement are dismissed. The agency had terminated awards made to the protesters and then subsequently made awards to other vendors. The protesters alleged that these other awards were essentially reprocurements and thus, under the FAR, the agency should have resolicited its requirements. GAO, however, found that the awards were not reprocurements. Rather, the agency had simply made awards to other offerors under the same multiple-award solicitation.
The Department of Veterans Affairs issued an RFQ under the commercial item procedures of FAR part 12, seeking nitrile examination gloves. The VA planned to make award to several vendors.
The agency awarded a contract to American Medical Equipment for 10 million gloves. Shortly thereafter, it awarded a contract for 25 million gloves to The Noble Attorney. But when the agency received gloves from American Medical and Noble, it found the gloves did not conform to the requirements in the RFQ. The VA terminated the contracts to Noble and American Medical.
The VA made subsequent awards to two other companies, Atlantic Trading, LLC and Bizcon LLC, for 50 million gloves each. Noble and American Medical each filed a protest challenging the awards to Atlantic and Bizcon arguing that they were improper reprocurements.
Under FAR 49.402-6(a), when supplies are not delivered under a contract terminated for default, the agency must repurchase the supplies as soon as possible. If the agency repurchases a quantity more than the undelivered quantity under the terminated contract, the agency must treat the entire quantity as a new acquisition.
Reasoning from this principle, American Medical and Noble contended that the awards to Atlantic and Bizcon were for quantities greater than the awards made to American Medical and Noble. Thus, the protesters concluded, the VA was required treat these new quantities as a new acquisition and thus resolicit the requirements.
But GAO found that the awards made to Atlantic and Bizcon were not reprocurements. Rather, they were made under the same solicitation, which had resulted in awards to American Medical and Noble. The goal of that RFQ had been to procure hundreds of millions of gloves, and the VA had planned to meet this goal by awarding multiple contracts. The awards to American Medical and Noble were just awards made an under a multiple award solicitation. GAO found that the protesters had failed to state a valid basis of protest.
Noble is represented by Carol A. Thompson, Eric S. Montalvo, and Haley Freking of The Federal Practice Group. American Medical is represented by Carol A. Thompson of The Federal Practice Group. The agency is represented by Natica Chapman Neely of the Department of Veterans Affairs. GAO attorneys Raymond Richards and John Sorrenti participated in the preparation of the decision.