Kodiak Base Operations Services, LLC (KBOS), a small 8(a) company based in Anchorage, Alaska, is protesting the award of a contract to Choctaw Defense Services, Inc. (CDS), a small 8(a) company of McAlester, Oklahoma, pursuant to Request for Proposals (RFP) No. HSCG84-16-R-PKC001, issued by the U.S. Coast Guard to support core operations. The protester alleges that the agency erred in assessing SNC`s past experience and performance and unreasonably failed to refer the issue of SNC`s size status to the Small Business Administration (SBA) for size. During World War II, the U.S. Navy established a base there on Kodiak Island to protect the Gulf of Alaska and serve as a stopover between the Cold Bay and Sitka facilities. Naval activities on Kodiak Island ceased in 1972 and the Coast Guard assumed operational responsibility for the property. The call for tenders was issued as part of a competitive freeze for small businesses under paragraph 8(a) and provided for the award of a fixed-price contract with perpetual delivery and indeterminate quantity for basic operating services at U.S. Coast Guard base Kodiak in Kodiak, Alaska. RfP at 4.7. The proposed contract provided for one reference year, four 1-year option periods and an additional option for a 6-month extension. Id.
at p. 5. Our Bid Contest Rules, 4 C.F.R. § 21.1 (c) (4) and (f), require that a protest contain a detailed explanation of the legal and factual reasons for the protest and that the reasons given are legally sufficient. These requirements require protesters to at least provide sufficient, if not contradicted, assertions or evidence to determine the likelihood that the protester will prevail in their claim of inappropriate action by the agency. Midwest Tube Fabricators, Inc., B-407166, B-407167, November 20, 2012, 2012 CPD ¶ 324 to 3. In addition, prejudice is an element of any viable protest, and a protester must demonstrate that without the agency`s actions, they would have had a significant chance of winning a prize. See Piquette & Howard Elec. Serv., Inc., B-408435.3, December 16, 2013, 2014 CPD ¶ 8 to 10; Supreme Foodservice GmbH, B-405400.3 et al., 11 October 2012, 2012 CPD ¶ 292 to 14.  In its first and first complementary protest, KBOS put forward various grounds for protest related to its own evaluation, as well as the technical evaluation and the winner`s award.
KBOS withdrew these earlier grounds for protest shortly after the presentation of its second additional protest. The protester`s comments on the agency are reported at 4 a.m. For more information on this feature, see these other EPO links: For definitions of the terms used, hover over or click on the term. Make sure your information is up to date. Plus, use our free tools to find new customers. Information materialInformation equipmentInformation perimeters (ID) The call for proposals is to be evaluated on the basis of six factors, some of which contained component sub-factors, as indicated in parentheses: (1) management approach (organizational chart and job descriptions); (2) experience (business experience and critical leadership); (3) the staffing plan; (4) past performance (company references and critical management references); (5) oral presentations (organizational chart and business support); and (6) the price. Id. at p.
52. The tender provided that each non-price factor would receive a high, medium or low confidence rating and that all factors other than price were of approximately equal importance. Id. at p. 68. In addition, the tender provided that the award would be made on the basis of best value for money and that factors other than price, when combined, were significantly more important than price. Id. Corrective measures or environmental indicators characterizing the entire plant are presented below.
This is not a long list of milestones and activities. This list and all data on this page is from the EPA`s CNCAinfo and is updated annually on this page. For this table and subsequent cleanup activities related to a part of the installation table, a space in the Status column may indicate that the action did not occur or was not reported in RCRAInfo. It should be noted that the tender provided that the past experience and performance of large subcontractors and parent or affiliated/sister companies could be credited to suppliers if the bidder`s proposal demonstrated that the resources of the affiliated parent company(ies) would affect the supplier`s performance. Call for tenders at 73. In this case, for the company`s experience and previous service parts of its proposal, CDS submitted four references from a large subcontractor, which was also a small 8(a) company, and one reference from a sister company that shares the same parent organization as CDS. Technical Evaluation of Proposals in paragraphs 31 to 32, INFORMATION ON CNS Past Performance, p. 1.
EPA RCRA ID: Location: Approximate Area: Other Names: Alternative Plant Names Cleaning State: Human Exposures under Control: Groundwater Under Control: Engineering ControlsEngineering ControlsEngineered Properties Aimed at minimizing the risk of human exposure to contamination by limiting direct contact with contaminated areas or controlling the migration of pollutants.  A contractor and its alleged subcontractor are treated as joint ventures and related companies for the purposes of design-basis. An alleged subcontractor is a subcontractor that is not an entity in a similar situation and that meets the primary and important requirements of a contract or contract, or that is a subcontractor on which the prime contractor is exceptionally dependent. 13 C.F.R. § 121.103(h)(4). The Agency received a total of three proposals, and the demonstrator and stakeholder received the following technical evaluations and proposed the following awards: The Agency awarded the award to CDS and found CDS to be both the highest rated technically and the cheapest supplier. Id. This protest followed. Among the main pollutants found at the BSU Kodiak plant are the following:  Even ignoring the fact that the client and its subcontractor appear to be in a similar situation, the issue of a prime contractor`s unusual dependence on a subcontractor, as the demonstrator acknowledges, is an extremely factual investigation that can be influenced by various factors. See protesters` comments on the agency`s supplementary report to 5, citing Size Appeals of CWU, Inc., et al., SBA No. SIZ-5118, p.
12 (2010). Given the complexity of the analysis, it is not clear under what circumstances such an unusual trust would be clear at first glance in a proposal. Institutional and technical controls help control human exposure and groundwater migration in a clean-up facility. If the types of state and EPA control were reported in the EPA`s CCARInfo, they are listed below. Not all types of controls are required in all facilities, and some facilities do not require controls. If there are spaces, the control types may not be necessary, may not exist, or may not be reported in RCRAInfo. 2. The protest that the agency improperly failed to return the winner to the Small Business Administration for sizing shall be rejected if the alleged facts do not support the conclusion that the agency`s actions were inappropriate. Application and Approval Tools Application and Approval Tools Application and Approval Tools (EP) For more information on the cleanup work underway at the facility, see the rcRA permit, available under “Site Documents” below.
With regard to its second argument, the manifesting party claims that the agency unreasonably failed to return CDS to SBA for sizing because CDS itself had no relevant performance reference and experience in the past and therefore exceptionally depended on its subcontractor. According to the protester, this relationship violated SBA`s alleged subcontracting rules and, if the case had been referred to SBA, would have led to the conclusion that CDS and its subcontractor were affiliated.