Lynwood Machine & Engineering, Inc., B-287652, August 2, 2001

B-287652 Aug 02, 2001 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST It was reasonable for agency to consider poor performance record of protester's proposed special projects manager in evaluating protester's past performance. Lynwood challenges the determination that its quotation was unacceptable. The work is preparatory to sale of these materials by DLA. The contractor will be required to handle a minimum of 200 MT per day. Award was to be made to the vendor whose quotation offered the best value to the government based on three factors: experience. Experience and past performance combined were considered significantly more important than price. Vendors were required to submit three references concerning projects within the last 2 years covering work the same as or similar to that required under the RFQ. View Decision Lynwood Machine & Engineering, Inc., B-287652, August 2, 2001 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Lynwood Machine & Engineering, Inc. protests the award of a contract to SAF Engineering Associates, Inc. under request for quotations (RFQ) No. SP0833- 00-Q-0171, issued by the Defense National Stockpile Center (DNSC), Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), for material handling services. Lynwood challenges the determination that its quotation was unacceptable. We deny the protest. The RFQ, issued for commercial items and utilizing simplified acquisition procedures, requested quotations for the stacking, banding, and weighing of approximately 3,972 metric tons (MT) of zinc, and approximately 78,564 MT of lead, at the DNSC facility in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. The work is preparatory to sale of these materials by DLA. The contractor will be required to handle a minimum of 200 MT per day. Because of the presence of fine particles of lead and lead components on the ingots and in the soil in and around the storage areas, the RFQ warned of potential health hazards and included requirements for testing and the use of protective clothing and respirators. Award was to be made to the vendor whose quotation offered the best value to the government based on three factors: experience, past performance, and price. Experience and past performance combined were considered significantly more important than price. In connection with the evaluation of past performance, vendors were required to submit three references concerning projects within the last 2 years covering work the same as or similar to that required under the RFQ. Five vendors, including Lynwood and SAF, submitted quotations. Lynwood's price of $998,685.60 was low, and SAF's price of $1,065,606.36 was the next low. For experience, Lynwood received a score of 3 out of 5 possible evaluation points, while SAF received a score of 5 points. For past performance, Lynwood received 3 of the 10 possible points, while SAF received 8.3 points. The agency also conducted a preaward survey of Lynwood which, because of unsatisfactory performance by Lynwood's proposed special projects manager and a lack of relevant performance/experience on the part of Lynwood itself, led to a recommendation that no award be made to Lynwood. As noted in the Recommendation for Award, the agency concluded that Lynwood lacked a record of acceptable past performance; Lynwood's quotation therefore was determined to be technically unacceptable. Contracting Officer's Statement at 5; Recommendation for Award at 4. DLA determined that SAF's proposal represented the best value, and made award to that firm. After receiving a debriefing, Lynwood filed this protest. EXPERIENCE Lynwood argues that its score under the experience factor was unreasonably low, noting that SAF received a higher score despite the fact that Lynwood was established in 1978, while SAF was not established until 1991, and that Lynwood's experience was evaluated as equal to SAF's in a previous procurement. When using simplified acquisition procedures, an agency must conduct the procurement consistent with a concern for fair and equitable competition. Environmental Tectonics Corp., B-280573.2, Dec. 1, 1998, 98-2 CPD Para. 140 at 4. When reviewing protests against an allegedly improper evaluation, we will examine the record to determine whether the agency met this standard and reasonably exercised its discretion. Lynwood Machine & Eng'g, Inc., B-285696, Sept. 18, 2000, 2001 CPD Para. __ at 4. The evaluation of experience was reasonable. The agency explains that the evaluation focused on each vendor's demonstrated ability to provide managers and personnel familiar with handling metals like lead and zinc, rather than on the length of time a company had been in existence. We find nothing unreasonable in this focus.