B-296627, Coastal Maritime Stevedoring, LLC, September 22, 2005
Case: B-296627
Agency:
Protester: B
Date: 2005-09-22
Sustained
B-296627
Sep 22, 2005
Jump To
VIEW DECISION
DOWNLOADS
RELATED PAGES
GAO CONTACTS
Highlights
Coastal Maritime Stevedoring, LLC protests the award of a contract to Marine Terminal Corporation East (MTCE) under request for proposals (RFP) No. W81GYE-05-R-0003, issued by the U.S. Army Surface Deployment and Distribution Command for stevedore and related terminal services at Blount Island Terminal in Jacksonville, Florida. The protester argues that the Army's evaluation of MTCE's proposal and the agency's "best value" determination were unreasonable.
We sustain the protest.
View Decision
B-296627, Coastal Maritime Stevedoring, LLC, September 22, 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: Coastal Maritime Stevedoring, LLC
File: B-296627
Date: September 22, 2005
Michael A. Gordon, Esq., and Donald C. Holmes, Esq., Holmes & Gordon, for the protester.
Capt. Geraldine Chanel, Department of the Army, for the agency.
Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.
DIGEST
1. Source selection authority unreasonably rated as satisfactory an offeror's small business subcontracting plan that failed to address many of the required elements of Federal Acquisition Regulation sect. 19.704 and that furnished conflicting information regarding offeror's overall objective for small business subcontracting.
2. Price/technical tradeoff determination that failed to take into consideration several of the advantages of protester's higher-rated, higher-priced proposal was not reasonably based.
DECISION
Coastal Maritime Stevedoring, LLC protests the award of a contract to Marine Terminal Corporation East (MTCE) under request for proposals (RFP) No. W81GYE-05-R-0003, issued by the U.S. Army Surface Deployment and Distribution Command for stevedore and related terminal services at Blount Island Terminal in Jacksonville, Florida. The protester argues that the Army's evaluation of MTCE's proposal and the agency's best value determination were unreasonable.
We sustain the protest.
BACKGROUND
Services to be furnished pursuant to the contract include the discharge and loading of ships, rail cars, and trucks and the drayage of containers between rail, truck, and ship staging areas. The solicitation requires that the contractor be capable of handling multiple and simultaneous vessel, rail, and truck operations on an around'the-clock basis. RFP Performance Work Statement at 10. The contractor is required to furnish all of the equipment needed to perform the services.
The RFP, which was issued on January 19, 2005, contemplated the award of a 4-year, fixed-price requirements contract to the offeror whose proposal represented the best value to the government. The solicitation provided for the evaluation of proposals on the basis of price and the following non-price factors, listed in descending order of importance: relevant experience, past performance, technical approach, management approach, and socio-economic commitment. Technical approach was to be evaluated on the basis of two equally-weighted subfactors--equipment and quality control. The solicitation further provided that the non-price factors, when combined, were approximately equal in weight to price.
Four proposals were received by the February 24 closing date. The agency evaluated the proposals, conducted discussions, and solicited final revised proposals. The technical evaluation team (which evaluated relevant experience, technical approach, and management approach) identified [deleted] in Coastal's final proposal. The technical evaluators identified [deleted] in MTCE's final proposal. The socio-economic commitment team did not assign Coastal a rating because Coastal is a small business; [1] it rated MTCE's proposal as [deleted] under the factor. Agency Report, Tab 23. As explained in greater detail below, after being advised by the program manager for the stevedore and related terminal services program, who served as chairperson of the technical evaluation team, that he thought that MTCE had [deleted] in its technical proposal, the source selection authority (SSA) [deleted] that had been assessed regarding that proposal. Negotiation Summary Memorandum, June 6, 2005, at 6. In addition, as also explained below, the SSA [deleted] of MTCE's proposal under the socio-economic commitment factor from [deleted].
[Deleted]
Prior to making her best value determination, the SSA again consulted with the program manager, asking him for estimates of the cost savings associated with the [deleted] identified in Coastal's proposal.
Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...