B-309869, KIC Development, LLC, September 26, 2007

B-309869 Sep 26, 2007 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights KIC Development, LLC protests the award of a contract to Sergent Mechanical Systems, Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. HSCG88-07-R-623221, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, for construction services. KIC asserts that the agency improperly determined that the awardee had relevant past performance. We deny the protest. View Decision B-309869, KIC Development, LLC, September 26, 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: KIC Development, LLC File: B-309869 Date: September 26, 2007 William K. Walker, Esq., Walker Reausaw, for the protester. Daniel L. Winand, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, for the agency. Peter D. Verchinski, Esq., and John M. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Allegation that awardee's prior contracts were not sufficiently similar in dollar value to work being solicited to be deemed relevant under past performance evaluation factor is denied where solicitation did not contain dollar threshold for relevance and past performance evaluation was otherwise reasonable and consistent with solicitation. DECISION KIC Development, LLC protests the award of a contract to Sergent Mechanical Systems, Inc. under request for proposals (RFP) No. HSCG88-07-R-623221, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, for construction services. KIC asserts that the agency improperly determined that the awardee had relevant past performance. We deny the protest. The RFP, issued on March 30, 2007 as a small business set-aside, sought proposals for all labor, materials, and equipment necessary to rehabilitate six buildings, design and construct a seventh building, and demolish and reconstruct an eighth building at the Coast Guard facility on Yerba Buena Island, San Francisco, California. Award was to be made to the offeror whose proposal provided the –best value,— with the evaluation to be based on two equally-weighted factors--–price and relevant past performance.— RFP at 37 (emphasis in original). The past performance evaluation factor was further broken down into seven subfactors (of equal importance): relevant experience, timeliness, quality of project execution, quality of construction services, management/business relations, effective subcontractor coordination, and customer satisfaction. RFP at 37. While the RFP defined –relevant experience— under the subfactor as similar services and –comparability of dollar value,— id., it did not provide a similar definition of relevance under the relevant past performance evaluation factor; rather, the solicitation included only a general statement that –... the source selection authority shall determine the relevance of similar past performance information.— RFP at 36. Under section L of the RFP, offerors were to identify past or current contracts for –efforts similar— to those being procured here and were to submit with their proposals a past performance evaluation--to be filled out by the company providing the reference--for each contract. RFP at 36. This form consisted of a general introductory paragraph explaining the work to be performed, and then listed the seven past performance subfactors, providing space for the reference to rate the offeror and provide comment. Under the first subfactor, the form stated –Relevant Experience: Contract involve[s] construction work: rehabilitate facilities and construct new pre-engineered facilities. $1mil-$5mil.— Agency Report (AR), Past Performance Survey, Tabs 15, 16. The reference was to explain the design and/or construction services the offeror had provided, and to list the contract dollar value. The agency received five proposals in response to the solicitation. In evaluating KIC's proposal, the agency found its past performance sources to be not relevant (on the basis that the contracts, for elevator maintenance work, were unrelated to the work here) and so evaluated its past performance as neither favorable nor unfavorable (i.e., neutral). Sergent's past performance was evaluated as acceptable based on four prior contracts for related work, valued at $707,000, $535,000, $317,000, and $148,000,[1] as well as on comments from a Coast Guard contracting officer technical representative regarding his experience with Sergent's performance. KIC's proposed price was $4.5 million, and Sergent's $4.6 million.