[Protest of Interior Method of Procuring Services Under Solicitations for Subsidence Monitoring]

A firm protested the Department of the Interior's method of procuring surveying services for subsidence monitoring, contending that since the work was related to architectural and engineering (A-E) services, Interior should have selected a contractor using Brooks Act procedures. GAO has held that if a survey is independent of an A-E project, the contracting agency may procure the survey under competitive statutes and regulations. GAO concluded that: (1) although an A-E firm could perform the services, the services were not a part of any A-E project; (2) the fact that engineers would evaluate the contractor's work had no bearing on the method of procurement; and (3) there was no requirement that an A-E firm perform the surveying services. Accordingly, the protest was denied.