Farmland National Beef, B-286607; B-286607.2, January 24, 2001

Farmland National Beef, B-286607; B-286607.2, January 24, 2001 TITLE: Farmland National Beef, B-286607; B-286607.2, January 24, 2001 BNUMBER: B-286607; B-286607.2 DATE: January 24, 2001 ********************************************************************** Farmland National Beef, B-286607; B-286607.2, January 24, 2001 Decision Matter of: Farmland National Beef File: B-286607; B-286607.2 Date: January 24, 2001 James H. Roberts, III, Esq., Manatt Phelps & Phillips, for the protester. Eliot J. Clark, Jr., Esq., Defense Commissary Agency, for the agency. Harvey G. Sherzer, Esq., Scott Arnold, Esq., and Mitchel Neurock, Esq., Howrey, Simon, Arnold & White, for Excel Corporation, an intervenor Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Where awardee's proposal to provide beef products to Department of Defense commissaries stated that the awardee was taking "exception" to the solicitation's mandatory delivery schedule, and the awardee's subsequent submissions further explained that it was proposing a "flexible" schedule under which the awardee would determine on a week-by-week basis when deliveries would be made to the various commissaries, award was improper in that the awardee's proposal failed to conform to a material solicitation requirement. DECISION Farmland National Beef (FNB) protests the Defense Commissary Agency's (DeCA) award of a contract to Excel Corporation under request for proposals (RFP) No. DECA02-00-R-0007 for the sale and delivery of beef to commissaries in the northern area of DeCA's Eastern Region. FNB protests the award on the basis that the agency improperly evaluated FNB's and Excel's proposals with regard to past performance, and that Excel's proposal took exception to the solicitation's delivery schedule requirements. [1] We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND The solicitation at issue was published on July 6, 2000, and sought proposals to provide all fresh beef products necessary to support specified commissaries within DeCA's Eastern Region. [2] The solicitation contemplated the award of a contract (or contracts) covering each of the four commissary groups for a 1-year base period with two 1-year option periods. The estimated value of the total procurement was slightly over $230 million. Section B of the solicitation lists the various types and estimated quantities of beef products for which offerors were required to propose fixed prices by commissary group and contract period. The solicitation contemplates weekly deliveries to the commissaries and contains a detailed delivery schedule which lists each commissary and identifies the days of the week, along with specific times of day, when deliveries are required. [3] RFP at 95-115. The solicitation expressly provides that "[p]roducts shall be delivered in accordance with the Delivery Schedule." RFP at 63. Offerors were advised that proposals would be evaluated on the basis of technical capability, [4] past performance, [5] and price, that technical capability and past performance were equally important, and that price was significantly more important than technical capability and past performance combined. RFP at 93-94. As amended, the solicitation required that proposals be submitted by August 4. Four offerors, including FNB and Excel, submitted proposals by the specified closing date. Excel's proposal included a letter with the following statement: Ladies and Gentlemen: In regards to solicitation DECA02-00-R-0007 the following exceptions to your request are brought to your attention. [Emphasis added.] . . . . . 6. In order to maximize freight rates and coordinate deliveries we would like to adjust the delivery schedules as needed to make routing of orders more orderly and economically. We will try to accommodate the original delivery dates and times whenever possible. By doing this we will avoid excess cost for delivery and pass this savings on to DECA. We realize this may take a short time period of adjustment by the commissaries but we feel the savings will off set the changes. Agency Report, Tab 8, Letter from Excel to DeCA (Aug. 3, 2000). Initial proposals were evaluated by a technical review board with the following results: Max.