TITLE: B-400173, Colliers International, July 3, 2008
BNUMBER: B-400173
DATE: July 3, 2008
**********************************************
B-400173, Colliers International, July 3, 2008

   Decision

   Matter of: Colliers International

   File: B-400173

   Date: July 3, 2008

   Michael P. Foley, Esq., Rendigs, Fry, Kiely & Dennis, LLP, for the
   protester.

   Brian S. Smith, Esq., and Amy B. Pereira, Esq., Department of the Army,
   for the agency.

   Lois A. Hanshaw and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General
   Counsel, GAO participated in the preparation of the decision.

   DIGEST

   Protest that agency improperly obtained services outside scope of
   multiple-award indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract is denied
   where the services were reasonably encompassed by the contract at issue.

   DECISION

   Colliers International protests the decision of the Department of the Army
   to obtain services to evaluate the feasibility of the U.S. Army Garrison
   Humphreys Housing Alternative Plan Concept (HHAP) under a multiple-award,
   indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) task order contract.
   Colliers maintains that these services are outside the scope of the ID/IQ
   contract.

   We deny the protest.

   On June 7, 2007, the Army Corps of Engineers, Far East District, awarded
   contract W912UM-07-D-0012 to Kunwon-CH2M Hill PMC, LLC (Kunwon). The
   contract, entitled the Program Management Consortium (PMC) contract, was
   to support a program, jointly established by the Republic of Korea and the
   United States, to realign and relocate a substantial amount of the U.S.
   military force structure from the Seoul metropolitan area to Camp
   Humphreys, Korea. The program required the establishment of a program
   management office, which would be responsible for a wide range of program
   management (PM) duties necessary to ensure the successful completion of
   the PMC program. The goal and objective of the program was to complete the
   U.S. base relocation within budget and schedule constraints and to provide
   the end user with the best achievable quality while satisfying the program
   schedule, effective cost management, safety, and environmental management.
   The statement of work in the contract listed various PM tasks, but stated
   that these were the "Outline of Services" and that "[t]he scope of
   services identified in [the] RFP only covers the general outline of the PM
   tasks. Therefore, the scope of services is not limited to the specific
   services described in this RFP." Contract sect. 3.1.1. Among the PM tasks
   listed in the scope of work were program-wide and program management
   services, such as financial feasibility studies, construction bidder
   interest, market analysis to determine key subcontractor's services, cost
   and value management, and construction cost estimates. The contract
   further stated that the contractor may be required to provide "special
   services" not specifically "clarified" in the PM section of the scope of
   work. Id. sect. 3.1.3.

   On January 25, 2008, the Army issued Task Order 0009 to Kunwon under the
   ID/IQ contract to evaluate the feasibility of the HHAP for implementation
   in Korea. Task Order 0009 required the contractor to conduct an industry
   forum on February 26, 2008 to provide information on the HHAP to Korean
   industry, to seek feedback from industry participants regarding the
   feasibility of implementing the concept in Korea, and to prepare a report
   on the feasibility of the HHAP. Kunwon employed Jones Lang LaSalle, a
   specialized consultant with housing development in Korea, to assist with
   the industry forum.

   Colliers protests that the task order is outside the scope of Kunwon's
   ID/IQ contract. According to the protester, the underlying multiple-award
   ID/IQ contract called for "the management of a program to `realign and
   relocate' a substantial amount of the US military force structure in Korea
   Opposition to Motion to Dismiss at 1. Colliers further argues that because
   the HHAP concept was not mentioned or contemplated when the IDIQ contract
   was awarded, it could not be considered within the scope of that contract,
   and conducting a study or an industry forum regarding a "complex leasing
   program for military family housing" involving the private sector was
   unlike the planning and management tasks set forth in the ID/IQ contract.
   Id.

   As a general rule, the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 (CICA)
   requires contracting agencies to obtain full and open competition in the
   procurement of supplies and services. 10 U.S.C. sect. 2304(a)(1)(A)
   (2000); Specialty Marine, Inc., B-293871, B-293871.2, June 17, 2004, 2004
   CPD para. 130 at 2. Our Office does not review a protest of the issuance
   or proposed issuance of a delivery or task order except for a protest on
   the ground that the order increases the scope, period, or maximum value of
   the contract under which the order is issued. 10 U.S.C. sect. 2304c. In
   determining whether a task or delivery order is outside the scope of the
   underlying contract, and thus falls within CICA's competition requirement,
   our Office examines whether the order is materially different from the
   original contract. Evidence of a material difference is found by reviewing
   the circumstances attending the original procurement; any changes in the
   type of work, performance period, and costs between the contract as
   awarded and the order as issued; and whether the original solicitation
   effectively advised offerors of the potential for the type of orders
   issued; overall, the inquiry is whether the order is one which potential
   offerors would have reasonably anticipated. Relm Wireless Corp., B-298715,
   Dec. 4, 2006, 2006 CPD para. 190 at 2.

   Based on the record, we conclude that the task order to evaluate the
   feasibility of the HHAP was within the scope of the ID/IQ contract as
   originally awarded. As previously noted, the contract required the
   efficient realignment and relocation of a substantial amount of the U.S.
   military force structure through PM techniques, such as financial
   feasibility studies, construction bidder interest, market analysis to
   determine key subcontractor's services, cost and value management, and
   construction cost estimatesIt seems apparent that a feasibility study
   regarding what approach should be taken regarding military housing at Camp
   Humphreys clearly relates to the efficient realignment and relocation of
   the U.S. military to that base with the best achievable quality, which was
   the primary purpose of the ID/IQ contract. Moreover, the industry forum
   and feasibility study, targeted to participants who could provide
   financial and technical feedback on the HHAP concept is the type of task
   contemplated by the ID/IQ contract. A financial feasibility study requires
   financial feedback and information, just as market analysis or
   construction related issues of bidder interest or cost would have to be
   based on technical insight. Further, the management nature of the contract
   necessitates a planning process sufficient to determine the scopes of work
   for separate projects, and to schedule and manage the implementation of
   those projects while complying with the program's budget and efficiency
   requirements. While it is true that the contract did not specifically
   provide for an industry forum concerning the HHAP concept, as indicated
   above, the scope of work for the ID/IQ contract was broad and specifically
   provided for unidentified "special studies," such as the feasibility study
   here.

   The protest is denied.

   Gary L. Kepplinger
   >General Counsel