B-298865.3, Team BOS/Naples--Gemmo S.p.A./DelJen, December 28, 2007

B-298865.3 Dec 28, 2007 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Team BOS/Naples--Gemmo S.p.A./DelJen (BOS) protests the award of a contract to Joint Venture Penauillie Italia S.p.A.; Cofathec S.p.A. (JVP) under request for proposals (RFP) No. N33191-06-R-0001, issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, for base operations services. The protester argues that the Navy unreasonably evaluated offerors' technical proposals, failed to conduct a reasonable price realism evaluation, and that the agency's selection decision was flawed both because of the above-referenced evaluation errors, and because of certain other errors in the information relied upon by the source selection authority (SSA) in his selection decision. We deny the protest. View Decision B-298865.3, Team BOS/Naples--Gemmo S.p.A./DelJen, December 28, 2007 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: Team BOS/Naples--Gemmo S.p.A./DelJen File: B-298865.3 Date: December 28, 2007 Philip J. Davis, Esq., William A. Roberts, III, Esq., John W. Burd, Esq., and John R. Prairie, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, and Reed L. von Maur, Esq., for the protester. T. Wayne Gray, Esq., Joseph P. Hornyak, Esq., and Megan M. Mocho, Esq., Holland & Knight LLP for Joint Venture Penauillie Italia S.p.A.; Cofathec S.p.A.; SEB.CO S.a.s.; CO.PEL.S.a.s., an intervenor. Damon Martin, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., and Ralph O. White, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging evaluation of offerors' technical and price proposals is denied where agency's evaluation was reasonable and supported by the record. 2. Protest challenging the adequacy and reasonableness of the agency's source selection decision is denied where the record supports the source selection authority's explanation that certain errors in the selection decision did not affect underlying rationale. DECISION Team BOS/Naples--Gemmo S.p.A./DelJen (BOS) protests the award of a contract to Joint Venture Penauillie Italia S.p.A.; Cofathec S.p.A. (JVP) under request for proposals (RFP) No. N33191-06-R-0001, issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, for base operations services. The protester argues that the Navy unreasonably evaluated offerors' technical proposals, failed to conduct a reasonable price realism evaluation, and that the agency's selection decision was flawed both because of the above-referenced evaluation errors, and because of certain other errors in the information relied upon by the source selection authority (SSA) in his selection decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP was originally issued on January 24, 2006, and sought proposals to provide base operations services for the Navy in the Naples, Italy area. Offerors were required to propose facilities management, facility investment, janitorial, pest control, refuse collection and recycling, ground maintenance, street sweeping and external area cleaning, service calls, and miscellaneous support services. The solicitation consolidated requirements that had been provided under separate contracts; JVP was the incumbent for most of these contracts. Agency Report (AR) at 2-3. The RFP anticipated the award of a fixed-price contract, with both fixed-price work and indefinite-delivery orders, for a 1-year base performance period and nine 1-year option periods. The RFP stated that proposals would be evaluated on the basis of the following factors: organizational experience, organizational past performance, management plan, staffing plan and resources, and price. The non-price factors were of equal importance and, combined, were –approximately equal in importance— to price. RFP sect. M-1. With regard to the organizational experience criterion, the RFP instructed joint venture offerors to –provide a single page that lists the joint venture partners along with the percentage of work each partner is proposed to perform for the [contract] and that briefly describes the specific work that each partner will be performing.— RFP sect. M-2. The RFP further advised that –if the Joint Venture offeror fails to comply with the requirement in this paragraph, then the Joint Venture offeror cannot be assigned a rating of satisfactory or better for this factor.— Id. As relevant here, the RFP stated that the agency would evaluate offerors' price proposals as follows: FACTOR 5, PRICE: 2. Price proposals will not be given an adjectival rating but may be evaluated for realism, completeness, balance and reasonableness using methods described below: i) Realism. Prices are compatible with the scope of solicitation, performance requirements, and proposed technical approach. . . . 3.