Valenzuela Engineering, Inc., B-283889, January 13, 2000

B-283889 Jan 13, 2000 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Higher-priced proposal is unobjectionable where the solicitation made technical considerations more important than price and the agency reasonably concluded that the technical superiority of the awardee warranted payment of the associated price premium. The RFP provided that the technical evaluation factors were significantly more important than price and indicated that the government was concerned with striking the most advantageous balance between technical management. Not only to determine whether it is reasonable. The evaluators were concerned that the number of personnel both offerors proposed to perform the services was excessive. The initial price proposals were as follows: Government CEC Valenzuela Estimate Total $18. View Decision Matter of: Valenzuela Engineering, Inc. File: B-283889 Date: January 13, 2000 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Valenzuela Engineering, Inc. protests the award of a contract to Clayton Environmental Consultants (CEC) under request for proposals (RFP) No. DACA05-99-R-0041, issued by the Army Corps of Engineers for the operation and maintenance of certain groundwater treatment systems located at the Los Alamitos Air Force Reserve Center in Orange County, California. Valenzuela principally challenges the source selection decision. We deny the protest. The solicitation, issued April 29, 1999, contemplated the award of a fixed-price contract to provide preventive maintenance, calibration, servicing, corrective repairs, sampling and analysis, and engineering services for the groundwater treatment systems at Los Alamitos Air Force Reserve Center. RFP Sec. B. The solicitation provided for award to the offeror whose proposal represented the best value to the government based on technical merit, price/cost and other pertinent factors. RFP Sec. M.2. The RFP technical evaluation criteria, listed in descending order of importance, consisted of operation and maintenance, engineering services, key personnel and organizational structure, past performance, and small/disadvantaged/women owned/minority business partnership compliance. RFP Sec. M.10. The RFP provided that the technical evaluation factors were significantly more important than price and indicated that the government was concerned with striking the most advantageous balance between technical management, quality, and past performance features and price. RFP Sec. M.6. With respect to price, the RFP provided that it would be "evaluated in accordance with FAR [Federal Acquisition Regulation Sec. 15.608 which states, 'The Contracting Officer shall use cost or price analysis to evaluate the cost estimate or price, not only to determine whether it is reasonable, but also to determine the offeror's understanding of the work and ability to perform the contract.'" RFP Sec. M.7. Valenzuela and CEC submitted the only proposals. The initial technical evaluation resulted in the following ratings: Offeror Technical Score Overall Technical Acceptability CEC 72.4 Very Good Valenzuela 46.5 Satisfactory Agency Report, Tab 6, at 1. While the source selection evaluation board (SSEB) rated the CEC and Valenzuela proposals as technically very good and satisfactory, respectively, the evaluators were concerned that the number of personnel both offerors proposed to perform the services was excessive. The initial price proposals were as follows: Government CEC Valenzuela Estimate Total $18,483,362 $8,825,070 $2,211,540 Price The evaluators found CEC's price proposal to be reasonable and acceptable; the evaluators determined that Valenzuela's proposed prices did not reflect an accurate understanding of the work requirements because the line item prices were unrealistically low in key areas and, as a result, the evaluators determined that the proposal represented a risk of nonperformance. Agency Report, Tab 7. By letters dated August 30, 1999, both offerors were advised that they were included in the competitive range. This letter also included amendment No. 0006, issued by the agency to resolve solicitation specifications that may have been ambiguous. Amendment No. 0006 also included the following change to the statement of work: "The proposal shall assume a maximum of 2 Full time equivalents (for example, 25% Chemist and 75% Geologist equals one full time equivalent). The persons that satisfy those equivalents shall have a combination of the skills listed in the subsections below." As a result of amendment No. 0006, the government estimate was revised to a total estimated cost of $8,613,395. Discussions were held with Valenzuela and CEC on September 7 and 8, respectively, and revised proposals were submitted by the September 13 closing date.