Al Hamra Kuwait Company, B-288970, December 26, 2001

B-288970 Dec 26, 2001 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Al Hamra asserts that Al Musairie was ineligible for award. The procurement was "[r]estricted to Kuwaiti firms. Award was to be made to the offeror "who submits a technically acceptable . . . proposal that represents the best value to the government.". The solicitation provided that the "[t]echnical proposal will be rated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis.". The RFP further provided that "[a]fter . . . technically acceptable proposals have been identified. Price and past performance will be evaluated to determine the combination that represents the best value to the Government.". Price and past performance were of "approximately equal importance and will bear a significant impact on the final award.". View Decision Al Hamra Kuwait Company, B-288970, December 26, 2001 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Al Hamra Kuwait Company protests the Department of the Air Force's award of a contract to Al Musairie National General Trading and Contracting, under request for proposals (RFP) No. F38604-01-R-0001, for the simplified acquisition of base engineering requirements (SABER) at Al Jaber Air Base and Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait. Al Hamra asserts that Al Musairie was ineligible for award, and challenges the evaluation of past performance. We deny the protest. The RFP provided for award of an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract for a base year, with 4 option years, to furnish the personnel, tools, and materials necessary for the design, management, and completion of maintenance, repair, alteration and/or new construction at Al Jaber Air Base and Ali Al Salem Air Base. The procurement was "[r]estricted to Kuwaiti firms, or firms, or partnerships with firms approved by the Kuwait Ministry of Defense/Military Engineering Projects (MOD/MEP), Central Tenders Committee." RFP, Standard Form (SF) 1422, Block 10. Award was to be made to the offeror "who submits a technically acceptable . . . proposal that represents the best value to the government." RFP Sec. M-2(a)(1). The RFP listed three evaluation factors: technical, price, and past performance. The solicitation provided that the "[t]echnical proposal will be rated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis." RFP Secs. M-2(a)(3), M-2(b). The RFP further provided that "[a]fter . . . technically acceptable proposals have been identified, price and past performance will be evaluated to determine the combination that represents the best value to the Government." RFP Sec. M-2(a)(4). In this regard, price and past performance were of "approximately equal importance and will bear a significant impact on the final award." Id. Fourteen proposals were received by the June 4, 2001 closing time. Final proposal revisions were received on July 9. Only five proposals, including Al Musairie's and Al Hamra's, were evaluated as technically acceptable (the agency also identified several strengths in Al Musairie's proposal, including an exceptional quality program and processes, highly skilled and qualified personnel, and the capability to provide any equipment required to accomplish the array of possible projects under the contemplated contract). Since these two proposals also received exceptional past performance ratings, and Al Musairie's price was low, the Air Force determined that it represented the best overall value to the government. Proposal Analysis Report at 11. Upon learning of the resulting September 16 award to Al Musairie, and after being debriefed by the agency, Al Hamra filed this protest challenging the award on a number of grounds. In reviewing an agency's evaluation of proposals and source selection decision, our review is confined to a determination of whether the agency acted reasonably and consistent with the stated evaluation factors and applicable procurement statutes and regulations. Main Bldg. Maint., Inc., B-260945.4, Sept. 29, 1995, 95-2 CPD Para. 214 at 4. Based on our review of the record, we find that the evaluation and the award to Al Musairie were reasonable. We discuss Al Hamra's principal arguments below. ELIGIBILITY FOR AWARD Al Hamra asserts that the awardee was ineligible for award because it did not exist at the time of initial proposal submission and was not on the MOD/MEP list, as required by the RFP. In this regard, Al Hamra notes that the September 29 written debriefing letter it received included an excerpt from the agency's evaluation in which the successful firm was identified as "Al Musairie National General Trading & Contracting CO. W.L.L.," that is, as a company with limited liability. Air Force Letter, Sept. 29, 2001, at 3. In contrast, notes Al Hamra, the Kuwaiti MOD/MEP list includes a listing for "Al-Musairie National General Trading & Contracting." Al Hamra Comments, Nov. 13, 2001, attach. MOD/MEP List, July 2000 (updated), at 4.