B-295582.4, Brewbaker White Sands JV, October 5, 2005

B-295582.4 Oct 05, 2005 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Brewbaker White Sands JV protests the award of a contract to NASCENT Group JV under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA801-04-R-0004, issued by the Department of the Air Force for Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirements (SABER) services at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico. The protester contends that the agency failed to follow the RFP's evaluation terms, since past performance was the most important evaluation factor, and the protester's proposal received a higher adjectival rating for past performance, but the award was made to NASCENT on the basis of its slightly lower-rated, lower-priced proposal. We deny the protest. View Decision B-295582.4, Brewbaker White Sands JV, October 5, 2005 DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Brewbaker White Sands JV File: B-295582.4 Date: October 5, 2005 F. Randolph Burroughs, Esq., Burroughs & Rhodes, for the protester. Maj. Lawrence M. Anderson and Eric Beckstrom, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Susan K. McAuliffe, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest of award to offeror that submitted slightly lower-rated, lower-priced proposal in a best value procurement is proper where record shows source selection authority performed a rational integrated assessment of proposals and reasonably determined that (1) both offerors' past performance proposals were essentially equal in terms of performance risk, and (2) despite protester's higher adjectival rating for past performance, price premium involved in an award to the protester on the basis of its slightly higher-rated, higher-priced proposal was not warranted given the acceptable level of technical competence available at the awardee's lower price. DECISION Brewbaker White Sands JV protests the award of a contract to NASCENT Group JV under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA801-04-R-0004, issued by the Department of the Air Force for Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirements (SABER) services at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico. The protester contends that the agency failed to follow the RFP's evaluation terms, since past performance was the most important evaluation factor, and the protester's proposal received a higher adjectival rating for past performance, but the award was made to NASCENT on the basis of its slightly lower-rated, lower-priced proposal. We deny the protest. The RFP, issued on May 10, 2004, contemplated the award of a fixed-price, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract for a base year and 4 option years for a broad range of maintenance, repair, minor construction/alteration and renovation work.[1] RFP at 139. The following evaluation factors were provided: technical, past performance, and price. Offers found to be technically acceptable were to be evaluated for past performance and price, with past performance more important than price. RFP at 142. Offerors were advised that [t]he government will consider awarding to an Offeror with higher qualitative merit and/or experience and past performance, provided the difference in price is commensurate with added value. Conversely, the Government will consider making award to an Offeror whose offer has lower qualitative merit and/or relevant experience and past performance if the price differential between this Offeror's proposal and other proposals warrant[s] doing so. Id.Both the protester's and NASCENT's technical proposals were evaluated as acceptable. Brewbaker White Sands received favorable ratings of very good to exceptional from its past performance references, and was rated exceptional for past performance by the evaluators, although the evaluators noted that no past performance information was referenced for the joint venture separate from its individual members, and that only limited government contract experience was identified for the joint venture's members. The evaluators also noted that several of the protester's references could not be reached for comments to support their unexplained high ratings. NASCENT's past performance reference ratings were also favorable, predominantly in the very good to exceptional range; NASCENT's past performance was given an overall rating of very good.