Orlando Business Telephone Systems, Inc., B-275053.5; B-

Orlando Business Telephone Systems, Inc., B-275053.5; B- BNUMBER: B-275053.5; B-275053.6; B-275053.7; B-275053.8 DATE: February 21, 1997 TITLE: Orlando Business Telephone Systems, Inc., B-275053.5; B- 275053.6; B-275053.7; B-275053.8, February 21, 1997 ********************************************************************** DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE A protected decision was issued on the date below and was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This version has been redacted or approved by the parties involved for public release. Matter of:Orlando Business Telephone Systems, Inc. File: B-275053.5; B-275053.6; B-275053.7; B-275053.8 Date:February 21, 1997 James P. Hodges, Esq., James P. Gallatin, Esq., and Stephen P. Murphy, Esq., Popham, Haik, Schnobrich & Kaufman, for the protester. Laura K. Kennedy, Esq., and Kelley P. Doran, Esq., Seyfarth, Shaw, Fairweather & Geraldson, for NEC Business Communications Systems, Inc., an intervenor. Jane Converse, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. David A. Ashen, Esq., and John M. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest against agency's post-protest reevaluation of past performance using new past performance reference for contract not listed in protester's proposal is denied where solicitation contemplated that agency would consider offerors' performance on other agency contracts for similar services whether or not offerors complied with solicitation requirement to list such contracts in proposals; fact that agency implemented stated intention only after protests had been filed is neither evidence of bias nor otherwise improper. 2. Protest against source selection based on agency's correction of offerors' summations of line item prices is denied where agency, anticipating that discrepancies were likely where offerors were required to complete 56 pages of detailed pricing schedules with hundreds of prices, advised offerors in solicitation that the agency would independently generate summary pricing tables and that only the unit prices, and not offerors' summations of their prices, would control. DECISION Orlando Business Telephone Systems, Inc. (OBT) protests the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) decision to terminate its contract and make award to NEC Business Communications Systems, Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. 101-21-96, for replacement of the telephone system at the VA Medical Center, San Juan, Puerto Rico. VA determined that its award to OBT resulted from an erroneous evaluation of offerors' past performance and that, based on a proper evaluation, NEC is in line for award. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The solicitation contemplated award of a fixed-price contract for the purchase, installation and maintenance (for up to 10 years) of a complete digital and voice telephone system. Award was to be made to the offeror whose technically acceptable proposal offered the "most advantageous alternative to the Government" under two approximately equal evaluation criteria: (1) past performance, and (2) cost/price. Offerors were to furnish "[a] list of all contracts and subcontracts completed within the last three years and all contracts and subcontracts currently in progress. Contracts listed shall include those entered into by the Federal Government. . . ." Offerors also were instructed that "[a]ll proposals shall provide examples of offerors' past performance and experience, as a PRIME CONTRACTOR, in successfully providing, installing and maintaining service comparable to those described in this document. A representative list of the PRIME CONTRACTOR's installed systems (within the continental United States) shall be submitted. . . ." However, the solicitation cautioned that the information to be utilized in the evaluation of past performance would be obtained not only from the references listed in the proposal, but also from "other customers known to the Government, including any VA contracts, consumer protection organizations, and others who may have useful and relevant information." With respect to cost/price, the RFP required offerors to complete on electronic media 56 pages of detailed pricing tables, providing "sufficient information on the price schedules so that the Government can determine the non-recurring and recurring charge of each and every item for service and equipment at any time during the contract life." Five proposals were received by the closing times on August 29, 1996 (for past performance proposals) and September 13 (for technical and price proposals). Four of the proposals, including NEC's and OBT's, were found technically acceptable.