[Protest of Marine Corps Evaluation Procedures in Laundry and Dry Cleaning Services Procurement]
B-220283: Jan 14, 1986
- Full Report:
A firm protested the bid evaluation procedures the Marine Corps used in a laundry and dry cleaning services procurement, contending that: (1) the policies and procedures for providing government property to contractors should have been used to compare the low government-owned, contractor-operated (GOCO) and contractor-owned, contractor-operated (COCO) bids; (2) a comparison of the low bid with the government's estimate would eliminate the cost advantage a GOCO bidder has over other bidders; and (3) the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76 cost comparison procedures were based solely on actual purchase cost to the government, less depreciation. GAO noted that: (1) bidders were advised that a cost comparison would be done to determine whether it would be more economical to accomplish the work in-house; (2) both the awardee's low GOCO bid and the protester's COCO bid were evaluated as lower in cost than the government's in-house estimate; (3) the two bids could not be compared directly because of their different cost bases; and (4) the Corps used OMB A-76 cost comparison procedures to adjust each bid. GAO found that: (1) although the solicitation did not explicitly state how the low GOCO and COCO bids would be compared, it did state that bids submitted under the GOCO and COCO schedules would be compared with the government cost under OMB A-76 procedures; (2) if the lowest bid received was lower than the government in-house cost, an award under either the GOCO or COCO schedule would be made; (3) it is not improper to use an OMB A-76 evaluation scheme for comparing GOCO and COCO bids; and (4) the allegation that a rental value factor should have been added to the GOCO bid for evaluation purposes was untimely filed. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.