B-299533, Battelle Memorial Institute, May 14, 2007

B-299533 May 14, 2007 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Battelle Memorial Institute protests the exclusion of its proposal from the competition under request for proposal (RFP) No. 2006-N-08556, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for comprehensive technical, scientific, research, and public health support for the National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities. Battelle contends that the agency improperly rejected its proposal for omitting option year pricing and that the agency should have, instead, allowed the firm to correct the omission. We deny the protest. View Decision B-299533, Battelle Memorial Institute, May 14, 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: Battelle Memorial Institute File: B-299533 Date: May 14, 2007 Richard B. Oliver, Esq., and David J. Ginsberg, Esq., McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, for the protester. Scott C. Briles, Esq., and Elise Harris, Esq., Department of Health & Human Services, for the agency. Sharon L. Larkin, Esq., Guy. R. Pietrovito, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Agency's decision to exclude protester's proposal from competition for failing to include option year pricing was reasonable, where the solication required that proposals contain this pricing and provided for award without discussions; agency was not required to allow protester to correct mistake because, although the omission was evident on the face of the proposal, the protester's intended pricing for the option years was not apparent. DECISION Battelle Memorial Institute protests the exclusion of its proposal from the competition under request for proposal (RFP) No. 2006-N-08556, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for comprehensive technical, scientific, research, and public health support for the NationalCenter on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities. Battelle contends that the agency improperly rejected its proposal for omitting option year pricing and that the agency should have, instead, allowed the firm to correct the omission. We deny the protest. The RFP provided for either a single award or multiple awards of fixed-price indefinite'delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) contracts with cost-plus-fixed-fee task orders. RFP at 67-68. Each ID/IQ contract award was to be for a 12-month base period with nine 1'year options, and the maximum value for each awarded contract was stated to be $92 million. Id. at 2'3. The RFP required offerors to provide two technical proposals: one was to address the RFP, and the other was in response to a –request for task order proposal— (RFTP) that was attached to the solicitation. Id. at 70-72; RFTP at 1. In addition to the technical proposals, offerors were required to submit a –business proposal,— that is, a cost proposal, based on the RFTP. This proposal was to be –supported by detailed cost data— and was to include, among other things, the –total proposed amount of the RFTP, including all phases, options or segments.— RFP at 66. The RFTP included a discussion of the base and option period requirements and required that offerors –identify each labor category, labor hours by category, indirect cost rates and respective allocation bases, other direct costs including travel costs for each of the performance periods as well as a summary for all performance periods,— and to provide a –full budget justification— for costs including cost differences from period to period.— Id., RFTP at 1. The RFP also required that –the estimated cost of each phase, option or segment of the offered work for the RFTP shall be itemized.— RFP at 66. The RFP contemplated a –two-step— evaluation process. In the first step, the agency was to evaluate technical proposals for the RFP (not the RFTP) and –[a]s a result of the RFP technical proposal evaluation, a competitive range will be established.— In the second step, the agency was to evaluate RFTP proposals and cost proposals and make award of one or more ID/IQ contracts and one task order award. Id. at 73.The RFP stated that the government intended to make award without discussions, but also that the government reserved the right to conduct discussions with those offerors in the competitive range –if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.— Id. at 63, 73. Battelle and eight other offerors submitted technical and business proposals by the November 29, 2006 closing date.