Gulf Copper Ship Repair, Inc.

B-272830 Sep 25, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Award of a contract for less than the actual quantity of work initially solicited was proper where the solicitation specifically informed offerors that the agency may award a contract for any item or group items listed in the solicitation unless an offeror qualified the acceptance terms of its offer. Which was not the case here. Department of the Navy for the post shakedown availability (PSA) of the USS ORIOLE (MHC 55). [1] Gulf Copper contends that award to South Texas based on initial proposals was improper because the Navy should have requested revised proposals after it deleted one of three production sub- line items from the solicitation following receipt of initial offers but prior to award. View Decision Matter of: Gulf Copper Ship Repair, Inc. File: B-272830 Date: September 25, 1996 Award of a contract for less than the actual quantity of work initially solicited was proper where the solicitation specifically informed offerors that the agency may award a contract for any item or group items listed in the solicitation unless an offeror qualified the acceptance terms of its offer, which was not the case here. Attorneys DECISION Gulf Copper Ship Repair, Inc. protests the award of a contract to South Texas Ship Repair, Inc., under request for proposals (RFP) No. N68958-96- R-0027, issued by the Resident Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion and Repair, Department of the Navy for the post shakedown availability (PSA) of the USS ORIOLE (MHC 55). [1] Gulf Copper contends that award to South Texas based on initial proposals was improper because the Navy should have requested revised proposals after it deleted one of three production sub- line items from the solicitation following receipt of initial offers but prior to award. We deny the protest. The RFP, issued on June 17, 1996, and amended six times, contemplated award of a fixed-price PSA contract to the lowest-priced, technically acceptable, responsible offeror. No evaluation factors other than price were identified in the RFP for the evaluation of proposals. Offerors were required to propose unit prices for three contract line items (CLIN) covering the work to be performed under the contract. Of significance to this protest is CLIN 0001, which was divided into three sub-CLINs to reflect different funding sources and funding limits; in addition, each sub-CLIN corresponded to different work items and types of effort. [2] Each sub-CLIN was to be separately priced, and the sum of the prices for the sub-CLINs would constitute the offeror's total price for CLIN 0001. The RFP included provisions of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sec. 52.215-16, Alternate II, informing offerors that the agency intended to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions; each offeror therefore was cautioned to ensure that its initial offer contained the offeror's best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The RFP clause also advised that "[t]he Government may accept any item or group of items of an offer, unless the offeror qualifies the offer . . . [t]he Government reserves the right to make an award on any item for a quantity less than the quantity offered, at the unit cost or prices offered, unless the offeror specifies otherwise in the offer." Three proposals were received by the July 15 closing date, of which only the awardee's and the protester's are relevant and therefore discussed here. As set forth below, South Texas submitted the low overall price for CLIN 0001. OFFEROR 0001AA 0001AB 0001AC TOTAL South Texas $764,508 $309,003 $99,473 $1,172,984 Gulf Copper $778,404 $304,468 $107,939 $1,190,811 After reviewing the initial proposals, the contracting officer determined that the proposed prices for sub-CLIN 0001AC exceeded the budgeted funding by more than 100 percent. Since additional funding for this sub-CLIN was not available, the funding authority directed the contracting officer to delete sub-CLIN 0001AC from the PSA package. The contracting officer issued amendment 0006 on July 16 to delete sub-CLIN 0001AC from the solicitation, and correspondingly deleted the unit price for that sub-CLIN from each offeror's total price. In doing so, the competitive standing of the offerors remained the same. Consistent with FAR Sec. 52.215-16, Alternate II, discussions were not conducted nor were revised proposals requested from any offeror. The contract was awarded to South Texas, the lowest-priced, responsible offeror, on July 17. Upon learning of the award to South Texas and the awardee's prices, Gulf Copper filed this protest with our Office.