California Resources, B-280176, September 8, 1998

B-280176 Sep 08, 1998 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Selection of slightly higher quote was proper where experience and past performance were more important than price. The procurement was conducted as a small business set-aside under the Simplified Acquisition Procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 13.5. The RFQ was to lead to a fixed-price. The contractor was to provide all necessary management. SSA personnel were to pack and sequentially number the boxes. The tops of which were to remain open. The contractor was responsible for palletizing and shrink-wrapping the boxes. The 10 loading sites are located in 7 different states. Quotes were to be evaluated based on experience. Quoters were required to submit a sufficient number of references. View Decision Matter of: California Resources File: B-280176 Date: September 8, 1998 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION California Resources protests the selection of Riojas Enterprises, Inc. (REI) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SSA-RFQ-98-3446, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration (SSA), for the relocation of SSA records from 10 locations to the SSA National Records Center (NRC) in Independence, Missouri. California Resources objects to the evaluation of its quote and selection of REI at a higher price. We deny the protest. The procurement was conducted as a small business set-aside under the Simplified Acquisition Procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 13.5. The RFQ was to lead to a fixed-price, indefinite-quantity contract for 1 base year, with four 1-year options. The contractor was to provide all necessary management, personnel, materials, services, facilities and equipment necessary to relocate boxes filled with confidential SSA records. SSA personnel were to pack and sequentially number the boxes, the tops of which were to remain open. The contractor was responsible for palletizing and shrink-wrapping the boxes, loading the palletized boxes into trucks, shipping the boxes to the NRC, and unloading the boxes and moving them to shelves in proper sequential order. The 10 loading sites are located in 7 different states. Quotes were to be evaluated based on experience, past performance and price, with experience and past performance equal in weight and more important than price. For the experience/past performance evaluation, quoters were required to submit a sufficient number of references, current or completed within the last 3 years, to demonstrate relevant experience and provide a record of relevant past performance. RFQ Sec. H-1(B)(1)(j). For each reference, quoters were to provide, in addition to basic identifying information, a full description of the services provided, including the extent to which the work was similar in size, scope and complexity to the requirement here (more specifically, information concerning "the transportation/storage of vital records or sensitive materials, the volume of materials handled, number of sites involved, personnel requirements and scheduling"). RFQ Sec. H-1(B)(1)(j)(i)-(iii). Experience was to be evaluated in terms of size (volume of material handled), scope (shipping sensitive materials with schedules established on short notice), and complexity (pickup from multiple sites for shipment to a single facility on a flow basis). RFQ Sec. I-1(d)(1). Award was to be made to the firm submitting the quote which represented the best value to the government. The RFQ warned that failure to supply complete reference information and a thorough description of the quoter's experience might result in the quote being eliminated from consideration. RFQ Sec. I-1(a), H-1(B)(1)(j). Of the nine quotes timely received, the protester's was low at $2,971,450, and REI's second low at $3,022,330. Four of the quotes were rejected for lack of sufficient experience information and/or the required reference information necessary to evaluate past performance. SSA found that four others, including the protester's, failed to include references demonstrating experience performing contracts of similar size, scope and complexity. Although the evaluators concluded that only REI's quote demonstrated adequate experience/past performance, and that the other quotes, including the protester's, were unacceptable, the contract specialist performed a price/technical tradeoff, which was adopted by the contracting officer, between the protester's and REI's quotes. The conclusion of that analysis was that REI's superior experience/past performance warranted paying REI's slightly higher price, and the agency thus made award to REI. California Resources argues that the evaluation of its quote, particularly with respect to the experience requirements, was unreasonable. It maintains that its quote in fact contained references which demonstrated its experience performing similar contracts.