Clifford La Tourelle

B-271505 Jun 05, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The inspection system established by a solicitation to evaluate the quality of a contractor's tree thinning services is sufficiently definite and unambiguous. The protester contends that the inspection system established by the IFB is unclear. The contractor was responsible for selecting those trees to be cut and those to be left. The contractor was to favor the larger. The contractor was to maintain a distance of approximately 14 feet. If this was necessary to retain a better tree. The government inspector would estimate the number of trees that the contractor should have retained within that plot. If the contractor's quality ratio was less than 86 percent. The government was entitled to reduce payment. View Decision Matter of: Clifford La Tourelle File: B-271505 Date: June 5, 1996 The inspection system established by a solicitation to evaluate the quality of a contractor's tree thinning services is sufficiently definite and unambiguous, where it gives bidders adequate guidance as to which trees to cut and which trees to leave and contains an inspection system that corresponds with this tree thinning guidance. Attorneys DECISION Clifford La Tourelle protests the terms of invitation for bids (IFB) No. R10-03-96-02, issued by the Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, to obtain tree thinning services in various areas of the Tongass National Forest, Alaska. The protester contends that the inspection system established by the IFB is unclear. We deny the protest. The IFB requested firm, fixed-prices for three line items. Each line item corresponded with specific areas of the forest and units of acreage to be thinned. The contractor was responsible for selecting those trees to be cut and those to be left, based upon guidance provided in the IFB specifications. In selecting which trees to retain, the contractor was to favor the larger, better-formed, more vigorous trees over diseased, forked, malformed, or damaged trees. In addition, the contractor was to maintain a distance of approximately 14 feet, stem to stem, between the trees to be retained. The contractor could increase or decrease the 14- foot distance between individual trees by 25 percent, if this was necessary to retain a better tree. However, the contractor could not exercise this spacing variation in such a way as to alter the average number of trees per acre that the government wished to retain. The IFB estimated that the contractor should retain 222 trees per acre, based upon the "14-foot by 14-foot spacing." The IFB established an inspection system to gauge the contractor's compliance with the tree thinning specifications. The government would conduct inspections based upon a series of .0315-acre plots. At each plot, the government inspector would estimate the number of trees that the contractor should have retained within that plot. The IFB assumed a "target" number of 7 retained trees per plot, which corresponds with 222 trees per acre. The IFB also stated that the inspector would adjust the target number according to the stocking of the plot and the 25-percent spacing variation allowed in the 14-foot distance between individual trees. To measure the contractor's compliance, the inspector would count the number of uncut trees in a plot and determine which of these trees met the specifications. If, for example, a contractor retained a diseased or damaged tree, the tree would be deemed unsatisfactory. In addition, if the contractor retained too few or too many trees based upon the target number established for that plot, each tree beneath or beyond the target number would be deemed unsatisfactory. After inspecting a sampling of plots, the inspector would add the total target number of trees and the total number of unsatisfactory trees; the ratio between these figures would reflect the quality of the contractor's tree thinning services. If the contractor achieved a quality ratio of at least 86 percent, the work would be deemed satisfactory and the contractor would receive full payment. If the contractor's quality ratio was less than 86 percent, the government was entitled to reduce payment, or to direct the contractor to rework an area, or to terminate the contract for default after repeated unsatisfactory performance. Mr. La Tourelle protests that the inspection system established by the IFB is unclear. The protester states that he does not understand how the government inspector will adjust the target number of 7 trees per plot, based upon the stocking of the plot and the 25-percent variation allowed in the 14-foot distance between trees.