TITLE: B-298953.2, GPA-Buffer, LP, March 21, 2007
BNUMBER: B-298953.2
DATE: March 21, 2007
******************************************
B-298953.2, GPA-Buffer, LP, March 21, 2007

   Decision

   Matter of: GPA-Buffer, LP

   File: B-298953.2

   Date: March 21, 2007

   Jeffrey E. Weinstein, Esq., for the protester.

   Barry D. Segal, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency.

   Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated
   in the preparation of the decision.

   DIGEST

   Request for reimbursement of protest costs is denied where record fails to
   establish that the agency delayed taking corrective action in the face of
   clearly meritorious protest.

   DECISION

   GPA-Buffer, LP requests that we recommend reimbursement of the costs
   GPA-Buffer incurred in connection with filing and pursuing a protest
   challenging the General Services Administration's (GSA) decision to enter
   into a sole-source agreement with the state of Florida to lease real
   property on which to construct office space for the U.S. Army Southern
   Command (SouthCom) headquarters.

   We deny the request.

   In August 2005, GSA and the state of Florida entered into a memorandum of
   agreement under which the state agreed to make a 40-acre site available,
   at no cost, for the subsequent construction of office space to house
   SouthCom's headquarters.[1] The memorandum provided that the state of
   Florida would subsequently conduct a competitive procurement for the
   actual construction of the required office space. Agency Report (AR), exh.
   22. The memorandum also provided, "it is anticipated that SouthCom will
   seek and obtain the required Congressional Title 10 authorization for this
   proposed project."[2] Id. at 2.

   In November 2005, GSA prepared a Justification for Other Than Full and
   Open Competition (JOTFOC) for its plan to non-competitively enter into a
   lease agreement with the state of Florida for the 40-acre site.[3] Among
   other things, the JOTFOC concluded that "[n]o other source has 40 acres of
   available land at no cost."[4] AR exh. 42, at 3.

   On April 28, 2006, the Army submitted the statutorily required notice to
   the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services, providing
   various information regarding the proposed acquisition.[5] In its notice
   to the Committee, the Army described its requirements, explained that its
   needs had outgrown the available space in the various offices located
   throughout the greater Miami area, noted that eight of the nine current
   locations do not meet DOD anti-terrorism and force protection standards
   established after the September 2001 terrorist attacks, and concluded: "No
   suitable government-owned or controlled space is available in the Miami
   area to satisfy this requirement. Accordingly, the Department of the Army
   requests authority to . . . lease the new build-to-suit facility on state
   land." AR exh. 50, at 2.

   On September 26, 2006, GSA published a "Notice of Intent to Procure Using
   Other Than Full and Open Competition" on the FedBizOpps Internet website,
   stating: "[GSA] proposes to enter into a noncompetitive lease procurement
   using other than full and open competition with the state of Florida for
   housing of the long term space needs of the United States Southern Command
   . . . in Doral, Florida." GSA Motion to Dismiss, Oct. 16, 2006, exh. 1.
   GSA explains that the September 26 notice "was issued to inform the public
   of GSA's intent to use the State offered no cost land." Contracting
   Officer's Statement at 6.

   On October 6, GPA filed a protest challenging the bases for the agency's
   determination to obtain the state's 40-acre site as a sole-source
   procurement. On November 13, the agency responded to GPA's protest, filing
   a report with this Office responding to the protester's various
   arguments[6] and maintaining that the agency's sole-source determination
   complied with applicable law and regulations.

   On November 16, 2006, the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Armed
   Services responded to the Army's earlier notice of the proposed
   acquisition, addressing various aspects of the Army's proposed actions.
   Among other things, the Committee stated:

     After careful review of the proposal, existing facilities, and
     headquarters requirements, the Committee believes that a replacement
     headquarters facility for USSOUTHCOM is indeed necessary. However,
     entering into a lease for a headquarters facility is neither the most
     economic nor the most effective means of meeting the needs of the
     command.

     As such, the Committee recommends pursuit of military construction
     funding to meet USSSOUTHCOM headquarters requirements.

   Letter from U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services to
   the Army, Nov. 15, 2006, at 1.

   On November 30, GSA advised our Office that it was no longer pursuing the
   sole-source lease agreement with the state of Florida, referencing the
   Committee's directions quoted above. Letter from GSA to GAO, Nov. 30,
   2006, at 1. In light of GSA's statement that it was no longer pursuing the
   sole-source procurement, we dismissed GPA-Buffer's protest as academic.

   Thereafter, GPA-Buffer submitted this request for our recommendation that
   GSA "pay [GPA-Buffer] its costs of filing and pursing the protest,
   including attorneys fees and bid and proposal preparation costs." Letter
   from Counsel for GPA-Buffer to GAO (Dec. 19, 2006).

   When an agency takes action which renders a protest moot prior to our
   issuance of a decision resolving the merits of the protest, our Office may
   recommend, in certain circumstances, that the protester be reimbursed the
   reasonable costs of filing and pursuing the protest. 4 C.F.R. sect.
   21.8(e) (2006). In this regard, we will generally recommend reimbursement
   of protest costs where an agency has delayed taking corrective action in
   response to a "clearly meritorious protest." [7] See, e.g., Johnson
   Controls World Servs., Inc.--Costs, B-299529.4, Aug. 19, 2005, 2005 CPD
   para. 162 at 8. However, not all agency actions that render a protest
   academic are "corrective" in nature and, further, even when an agency
   takes action that it describes as "corrective," that action does not, of
   itself, establish that the protest was "clearly meritorious." Spar Applied
   Sys.--Declaration of Entitlement, B-276030.2, Sept. 12, 1997, 1997 CPD
   para. 70 at 5.

   Here, based on the record discussed above, we are unable to conclude that
   the agency took "corrective action" in response to GPA-Buffer's protest,
   nor can we conclude that GPA-Buffer's protest was "clearly meritorious."
   As discussed above, GSA and the Army abandoned the proposed acquisition of
   real property based on the House Armed Services Committees' direction that
   "entering into a lease for a headquarters facility is neither the most
   economic nor the most effective means of meeting the needs of the
   command," and the Committee's recommendation that SouthCom "[pursue]
   military construction funding to meet USSSOUTHCOM headquarters
   requirements." Based on this record, we are unable to conclude that the
   agency's action in abandoning the proposed no-cost sole-source acquisition
   was "corrective action" taken in response to GPA-Buffer's protest and,
   similarly, based on our truncated protest process, we cannot conclude that
   the agency's proposed sole-source acquisition of property on a no-cost
   basis constituted a clear violation of procurement statute or regulation
   for which there was no "defensible legal position."[8]

   Since we are unable to conclude that the agency delayed taking corrective
   action in the face of a clearly meritorious protest, we decline to
   recommend reimbursement of GPA-Buffer's costs.

   The request for reimbursement of costs is denied.

   Gary L. Kepplinger
   General Counsel

   ------------------------

   [1] SouthCom currently occupies office space in nine different locations
   in the greater Miami area, including a site owned by the protester. The
   purpose of the planned acquisition was to consolidate the SouthCom offices
   at a single location.

   [2] The provisions of 10 U.S.C. sect. 2662 require the Department of
   Defense (DOD) to notify its congressional oversight committees prior to
   conducting certain transactions involving real property.

   [3] The agency concluded that, to meet SouthCom's consolidated office
   requirements, a site of at least 40 acres was required. Prior to executing
   the JOTFOC, GSA conducted a market survey during which GSA identified five
   potential sites that were at least 40 acres in size, but determined that
   none of those sites was available at no cost to the government. AR exh.
   10; Contracting Officer's Statement at 2. GSA also obtained data
   indicating that the appraised value of the state of Florida's 40-acre site
   was between $27 million and $40 million in fiscal year 2005. AR exh. 35.

   [4] The protester's site, which is one of the nine sites in the greater
   Miami where SouthCom currently has office space, is approximately
   25 acres.

   [5] The notification was similarly sent to the U.S. Senate Committee on
   Armed Services.

   [6] Initially, GSA sought dismissal of the protest, arguing that it was
   not timely filed. In response, this Office notified counsel for the
   parties that we did not intend to dismiss the protest prior to receipt of
   a complete agency report. Thereafter, the agency report was timely
   submitted to GAO and to the protester.

   [7] We have described a "clearly meritorious" protest as one that does not
   involve a "close question," or one where a reasonable agency inquiry would
   have revealed the "absence of a defensible legal position." See PADCO,
   Inc., B-289096.3, May 3, 2002, 2002 CPD para. 135 at 3.

   [8] There can be no dispute that the agency acted promptly in responding
   to the Committee's directions.