Public-Private Competitions

Review of San Antonio Depot Solicitation Gao ID: OGC-98-49 May 14, 1998

The Air Force lacked a well-supported rational for combining, under a single contract, the diverse workloads at the closing San Antonio air logistics center. This requirement may unduly restrict competition by eliminating potential bidders who are capable of performing some, but not all, of the individual workloads. For the San Antonio contract, the Air Force included three dissimilar engine workloads as a single requirement. The law requires that a workload competition be reasonably required to satisfy the agency's needs, and not simply an outgrowth of the agency's desire for administrative convenience or an unsupported claim that economies will be achieved. GAO found that the Air Force's supporting rational does not justify the workload combination. However, the rationale for the combination includes some elements, such as readiness concerns and potential competition enhancements, that, if supported, could establish the reasonableness of the combination under the acquisition laws.

GAO noted that: (1) on March 30, 1998, the Air Force issued a solicitation for the purpose of conducting a public-private competition for various depot-level workloads being performed at the San Antonio Air Logistics Center at Kelly Air Force Base, Texas; (2) the solicitation provides for a single award, for a period up to 15 years, for the performance of workloads for the T56, TF39, and F100 engines and fuel accessories; (3) based on GAO's review of the San Antonio solicitation and concerns raised informally by potential offerors, GAO found that the Air Force has not, as of May 5, provided a sufficient basis to show that soliciting the workloads on a combined basis is necessary to satisfy its needs; and (4) GAO found that the solicitation is in compliance with applicable laws, including the provisions of 10 U.S.C. 2469a.



The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.