Efficiency Management & Engineering Company;, B-292676; B-292676.2, October 31, 2003

Efficiency Management & Engineering Company;, B-292676; B-292676.2, October 31, 2003 TITLE: Efficiency Management & Engineering Company;, B-292676; B-292676.2, October 31, 2003 BNUMBER: B-292676; B-292676.2 DATE: October 31, 2003 ********************************************************************** Efficiency Management & Engineering Company;, B-292676; B-292676.2, October 31, 2003 Decision Matter of: Efficiency Management & Engineering Company; Norcor Technologies Corporation File: B-292676; B-292676.2 Date: October 31, 2003 Emory B. Woods, Efficiency Management & Engineering Company, and Wes Clayton, Norcor Technologies Corporation, for the protesters. Eric Kattner and Dennis A. Walker, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Paul E. Jordan, Esq., and John M. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Agency*s consideration of more than three contracts in evaluating offerors* past performance was unobjectionable where solicitation required offerors to submit detailed information on three most relevant contracts, but did not specify three as the maximum, and specifically requested offerors to include in their proposals a listing of all contracts performed within past 3 years. 2. Agency*s price reasonableness evaluation, which compared overall and individual prices, but did not penalize offeror for proposing lower rates than the incumbent, was unobjectionable; purpose of price reasonableness review is to determine whether prices offered are higher--as opposed to lower--than warranted. 3. In price/technical tradeoff decision, where past performance and price were of approximately equal weight, and agency was fully aware of the proposals* relative technical and price advantages, agency reasonably determined that awardee*s proposal with rating of very good/significant confidence and higher price was best value compared to one protester*s proposal with neutral/unknown confidence rating and lower price and second protester*s proposal with exceptional/high confidence rating but higher price. DECISION Efficiency Management & Engineering Company (EMEC), the incumbent contractor, and Norcor Technologies Corporation protest the award of a contract to Cirrus Technologies, Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. F09650-03-R-0006, issued by the Department of the Air Force for advisory and assistance services. We deny the protests. The RFP was issued as a competitive section 8(a) set-aside for contract administration, reconciliation, and closeout services for physically completed contracts in support of the various directorates at Warner Robins Air Force Base, Georgia. The RFP contemplated the award of a fixed-price, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract with a 5-year ordering period. Proposals were to be evaluated on the basis of two factors of approximately equal value--past performance and price--and award was to be made to the firm submitting the proposal representing the *best value* to the agency. Past performance information was to be evaluated on the basis of relevance--very relevant, relevant, semi-relevant, or not relevant--and based on the evaluation of past performance, the agency was to make an overall confidence assessment--exceptional/high confidence, very good/significant confidence, satisfactory/confidence, neutral/unknown confidence, marginal/little confidence, or unsatisfactory/no confidence. Twelve firms, including Norcor, EMEC, and Cirrus, submitted proposals. After an initial review of the proposals, the agency issued evaluation notices seeking clarification of offerors* past performance.