Structural Preservation Systems, Inc., B-285085, July 14, 2000

B-285085 Jul 14, 2000 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Allegation that agency misevaluated awardee's proposal is denied where the record shows that the evaluation was reasonable and in accordance with the evaluation criteria. 2. Higher-priced proposal is unobjectionable where solicitation stated that price and technical factors were of equal weight and the agency reasonably determined that the proposal's technical superiority warranted payment of the associated price premium. It should have received the award under a proper tradeoff. Balanced stabilized grouts were to be designed and tested to reduce grouting processes. Procedures were to be refined as work progressed to achieve a residual permeability specified in "Lugeons." /1/ RFP at l. Real time computer monitoring with visual display of foundation permeabilities using electronic sensing of grouting parameters to determine these permeabilities was also called for. View Decision Matter of: Structural Preservation Systems, Inc. File: B-285085 Date: July 14, 2000 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Structural Preservation Systems, Inc. (SPS) protests the award of a contract to Advanced Construction Techniques, Ltd. (ACT) under request for proposals (RFP) No. DACW27-00-R-0006, issued by the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers for seepage remediation at Patoka Lake, Indiana. SPS objects to the agency's evaluation of ACT's proposal and contends that as the low-priced offeror, it should have received the award under a proper tradeoff. We deny the protest. The RFP, issued on January 20, 2000, sought proposals for the construction of a specified balanced stabilized grouting based seepage cutoff for Patoka Lake. RFP Sec. 00130, Para. 1. Balanced stabilized grouts were to be designed and tested to reduce grouting processes, and procedures were to be refined as work progressed to achieve a residual permeability specified in "Lugeons." /1/ RFP at l. Real time computer monitoring with visual display of foundation permeabilities using electronic sensing of grouting parameters to determine these permeabilities was also called for. Id. The solicitation provided for the award of a fixed-price contract to the offeror whose proposal offered the most advantage to the government and cautioned that award could be made on the basis of initial offers without discussions. RFP Sec. 00130, Para. 2.6. The solicitation provided that all evaluation factors other than price, when combined, were approximately equal to price, and listed the following five evaluation factors which were to be point scored, in descending order of importance: technical approach, experience, management plan, equipment and materials, and safety. RFP Sec. 00130, Paras. 3 and 4. Price was not to be point scored. RFP Sec. 00130, Para. 2.5. The agency received eight proposals by the March 1 closing date. All eight proposals were initially reviewed by a proposal compliance review team to ensure that they were in conformance with the RFP requirements. The seven-member evaluation board then evaluated the proposals by initially crediting the proposals with half of the total points available for each sub-factor to reflect that the proposals were in conformance with the solicitation. If the board determined that a proposal exceeded the minimum requirements, the proposal was awarded additional points under the applicable sub-factor. Points were to be deducted where the board determined that a proposal did not meet the minimum requirements specified in the RFP. Agency Report, Tab 6, Evaluation Board Memorandum, at 1-2. The evaluation board recorded its consensus scores and the comments for the various evaluation factors and sub-factors involved on the scoring sheets. These consensus scoring sheets represent the complete documentary evidence underlying the board's evaluation process. Agency Report at 3. /2/ The evaluation board point scoring of SPS's and ACT's proposals at the factor level (with the maximum available points in parentheses) was as follows: SPS ACT Technical Approach (40,000) 34,500 37,000 Experience (30,000) 21,500 26,000 Management (15,000) 9,000 13,000 Equipment & Materials (10,000) 8,500 8,000 Safety (5,000) 3,000 2,500 Total Points (100,000) 76,500 86,500 Agency Report, Tab 6, Evaluation Board Memorandum, at 2. The total prices proposed by these offerors were: SPS $1,397,725 ACT $1,594,205 Id. at 12. The evaluation board found ACT's proposal, which received the highest point score, to be a superior technical presentation that covered all aspects of the computer monitoring system and operations required in the RFP. Id. at 2. Under the experience factor, ACT was awarded additional points because of its performance of a substantial number of similar type of projects utilizing similar grouting, and because ACT and its proposed subcontractor worked together on several similar projects since 1997. Id.