B-420821

Vietnam-Australia Environment Joint Stock Company

Jul 15, 2022.United States Agency for International DevelopmentU.S. Agency for International Development
Dismissed

GAO Digest

Vietnam-Australia Environment Joint Stock Company (VINAUSEN) of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, protests the award of a contract to Vina E&C Investment and Construction Joint Stock Company, of Vung Tau City, Vietnam, under invitation for bids (IFB) No. 72044021B00001, issued by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) for construction services at the Bien Hoa Airbase in Bien Hoa, Vietnam. The protester contends that the agency should have rejected Vina's low bid because Vina did not have an active registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) at the time of bid submission as required by the IFB. We dismiss the protest because, as filed with our Office, it does not establish a valid basis for challenging the agency's action.

Key Facts

Decision date
Jul 15, 2022.
Publicly released
Jul 18, 2022.
Agency
United States Agency for International Development
Department
U.S. Agency for International Development
Decided by
Edda Emmanuelli Perez, General Counsel

Counsel

Protester
Vietnam-Australia Environment Joint Stock Company
Agency
United States Agency for International Development
John B. Alumbaugh, Eugene Benick
GAO
Office of the General Counsel, GAO
Christine Milne, Tania Calhoun

Procurement

Awardee
Vina E&C Investment and Construction Joint Stock Company
Solicitation
72044021B00001 (IFB)
Instrument
Contract
Issued by
United States Agency
View on GAO.gov Decision PDFThe outcome, grounds and appearances above are derived deterministically from GAO's published text. The decision on GAO.gov is the source of record.

Research This Decision

Create a free account to open this decision in the GAO Protest workspace: semantic search for similar protests, the citation graph, and the research agent over the whole corpus.

Similar Decisions

Protests that read like this one, ranked by the decision text across the whole corpus rather than by keyword.

Citation Graph

This decision's cited authorities, agency and related protests as an interactive knowledge graph.

Full Decision

Full text of the decision7,859 characters, captured from GAO's own published text Decision PDFOfficial source: GAO.gov

Authorities cited

4 authorities read from this decision's own text, grouped by the body of law each comes from. Select one to read it at its publisher.

Federal Acquisition Regulation2
GAO Bid Protest Regulations2

Read from the decision's own words with no model involved. Statutes, regulations, the acts these forums argue by name, and cases at the board, this office or the Comptroller General are recognized; any other citation form is left out rather than guessed at, so this is a floor on what the decision cites.

Cases cited

2 cases this decision cites, in the order it first names them. 2 of them open in this app.

Read from the decision's own words with no model involved: the party names and the citation are as the decision prints them. A case named without a citation of any kind carries nothing to read, so it is left out rather than guessed at, and this is a floor on what the decision cites.

Highlights

Vietnam-Australia Environment Joint Stock Company (VINAUSEN) of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, protests the award of a contract to Vina E&C Investment and Construction Joint Stock Company, of Vung Tau City, Vietnam, under invitation for bids (IFB) No. 72044021B00001, issued by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) for construction services at the Bien Hoa Airbase in Bien Hoa, Vietnam. The protester contends that the agency should have rejected Vina's low bid because Vina did not have an active registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) at the time of bid submission as required by the IFB.

Decision

Matter of: Vietnam-Australia Environment Joint Stock Company

File: B-420821

Date: July 15, 2022

Hien Bui, Vietnam-Australia Environment Joint Stock Company, for the protester.

John B. Alumbaugh, Esq., and Eugene Benick, Esq., United States Agency for International Development, for the agency.

Christine Milne, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.

Digest

Protest arguing agency was required to reject low bid because the bidder did not have an active System for Award Management (SAM) registration at the time of bid submission as required by solicitation is dismissed. Compliance with SAM registration requirements are matters of bidder responsibility, not bid responsiveness, therefore the agency correctly allowed the awardee to cure its SAM registration prior to award.

Decision

Vietnam-Australia Environment Joint Stock Company (VINAUSEN) of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, protests the award of a contract to Vina E&C Investment and Construction Joint Stock Company, of Vung Tau City, Vietnam, under invitation for bids (IFB) No. 72044021B00001, issued by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) for construction services at the Bien Hoa Airbase in Bien Hoa, Vietnam. The protester contends that the agency should have rejected Vina’s low bid because Vina did not have an active registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) at the time of bid submission as required by the IFB.

We dismiss the protest because, as filed with our Office, it does not establish a valid basis for challenging the agency’s action.

BACKGROUND

On November 17, 2021, the agency issued the IFB seeking sealed bids for dioxin remediation services as part of the USAID Civil Works – phase 1 construction project at the Bien Hoa Airbase in Bien Hoa, Vietnam. Protest, Tab 1, IFB at 1. The IFB was issued in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 14 and incorporated by reference FAR provision 52.204-7, “System for Award Management (SAM) (Oct 2018),” which requires in part that bidders are registered in SAM at the time of submitting a bid. Protest, Tab 1, IFB at 1, 72; FAR 52.204-7(b)(1).

The agency received 4 bids in response to the IFB and opened bids on March 2, 2022. Protest, Tab 3, Bid Abstract at 1-2. Vina was the apparent low bidder with an estimated total price of $28,995,555, and VINAUSEN was the second lowest bidder with an estimated total price of $29,678,678. Id. at 2. On March 8, VINAUSEN emailed and informed the agency that Vina’s SAM registration was expired on the day bids were submitted. Protest, Tab 4, Email from Protester to Agency, Mar. 8, 2022; Protest, Tab 4, Email from Agency to Protester, Mar. 15, 2022. The agency responded that the contracting officer was required to allow Vina to correct this immaterial defect, and that Vina’s bid would still be considered for award. Id.

On April 7, VINAUSEN emailed the agency again stating that Vina’s registration still had not been reactivated and therefore Vina should be excluded from consideration for award. Protest, Tab 4, Email from Protester to Agency, April 7, 2022. The agency acknowledged that it received VINAUSEN’s email but provided no further response. Protest, Tab 4, Email from Agency to Protester, April 7, 2022. Vina’s registration was reactivated on June 4, and the agency awarded the contract to Vina on June 15. Req. for Dismissal at 4; Protest, Tab 5, Notice of Award at 1. This protest followed.

DISCUSSION

VINAUSEN argues that the agency improperly awarded the contract to Vina because Vina’s bid did not comply with the terms of the solicitation. That is, VINAUSEN asserts that Vina was ineligible for award because the solicitation required that bidders be registered in SAM at the time bids were submitted, and Vina’s registration was inactive on the day of bid submission. Protest at 1-3.

The solicitation instructed that in accordance with FAR provision 52.204-7, as incorporated by reference, “a bidder is required to be registered in SAM when submitting a bid and shall continue to be registered until time of award, during performance, and through final payment of any contract, resulting from this solicitation.” IFB at 1, 73; FAR 52.204-7(b)(1). The agency reaffirmed this requirement in the question and answer portion of the solicitation as well, stating: “Bidders must be registered in SAM.gov upon bid submission.” Protest, Tab 2, IFB, amend. 2, Question and Answers at 3.

While VINAUSEN is correct that the solicitation required bidders to be registered in SAM at the time of bid submission, we have consistently stated that inactive SAM registration at the time of bid submission constitutes an immaterial defect. See Jade Excavation, Inc., B-419515, Mar. 18, 2021, 2021 CPD ¶ 128 at 2 (“the requirement for a bidder to be registered in SAM prior to bid submission is not material to the bid itself because it does not impact the material obligations of the bidder; rather, it is a matter concerning the bidder’s responsibility.”); Master Pavement Line Corp., B-419111, Dec. 16, 2020, 2020 CPD ¶ 404 at 5. Section 14.405 of the FAR provides in part that where a bid contains a minor informality or irregularity, “[t]he contracting officer either shall give the bidder an opportunity to cure any deficiency resulting from a minor informality or irregularity in a bid or waive the deficiency, whichever is to the advantage of the Government.” FAR 14.405. Therefore, the agency was required to either allow Vina to correct the defect or waive it.

As a result, VINAUSEN’s argument that Vina should not have been considered for award due to its inactive SAM registration lacks a basis upon which to sustain the protest. Midwest Tube Fabricators, Inc., B‑407166, B‑407167, Nov. 20, 2012, 2012 CPD ¶ 324 at 3; 4 C.F.R. § 21.5(f).

VINAUSEN also argues that Vina took too long to reactivate its SAM registration and therefore should have been excluded from consideration for award. Response to the Req. for Dismissal at 2-3. Vina raised this argument for the first time in its response to the agency’s request for dismissal, filed on June 27, even though Vina has known when VINAUSEN reactivated its SAM registration since June 15. A protest based on other than alleged improprieties in a solicitation must be filed no later than 10 calendar days after the protester knew, or should have known, of the basis for protest, whichever is earlier. 4 C.F.R. § 21.2(a)(2). Therefore, this argument is untimely and we will not consider it further.

Lastly, VINAUSEN argues that Vina’s inactive SAM registration violates the terms of a contract Vina is currently performing for the agency. Protest at 1. This argument concerns a matter of contract administration as it relates to a contract currently being performed, and we generally do not review matters of contract administration, which are within the discretion of the contracting agency and for review by a cognizant board of contract appeals or the Court of Federal Claims. 4 C.F.R. § 21.5(a). The few exceptions to this rule are not applicable here.

The protest is dismissed.

Edda Emmanuelli Perez

General Counsel

This is a verbatim capture of GAO's own published decision. Nothing is summarized or reworded, and the sections run in the order GAO wrote them. One thing is moved: GAO collects its numbered notes at the foot of the document, and each is shown here under the paragraph that first cites it, with its own number carrying you back. A note the decision never cites stays where GAO printed it.

Related Decisions

Same Agency

Same Year

Newsletter

New decisions every Monday

GovConDash Weekly lists the decisions GAO, the boards, the courts and SBA OHA released that week, alongside the FAR Overhaul deviations and proposed rules that reach every contractor. Free.

Free, weekly, and one click to unsubscribe. We send a confirmation email first. See our Privacy Policy.