B-310119, HERA Constructive S.A., November 7, 2007

B-310119 Nov 07, 2007 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights HERA Constructive S.A. protests the award of a contract to Michael M. Tsontos S.A. under request for proposals (RFP) No. N33191-05-B-1204 by the Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, for construction and renovation of the Navy Exchange buildings (known as the "NEXMART") at the Naval Support Activity Souda Bay in Crete, Greece. HERA argues that Tsontos was ineligible for award because it does not possess the appropriate construction license, which the RFP required. We deny the protest. View Decision B-310119, HERA Constructive S.A., November 7, 2007 Decision Matter of: HERA Constructive S.A. File: B-310119 Date: November 7, 2007 Constantinos Fotiadis for the protester. Kate Bazylewicz, Esq., and Tracy M. Humphrey, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Paul N. Wengert, Esq., and Ralph O. White, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest is denied where provision in solicitation requiring offerors to present a certificate issued by the Greek government authorizing construction of –projects of the cost value, type, and magnitude— of the solicitation was reasonably interpreted in accepting certificate submitted by awardee. DECISION HERA Constructive S.A. protests the award of a contract to Michael M. Tsontos S.A. under request for proposals (RFP) No. N33191-05-B-1204 by the Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, for construction and renovation of the Navy Exchange buildings (known as the –NEXMART—) at the Naval Support Activity Souda Bay in Crete, Greece. HERA argues that Tsontos was ineligible for award because it does not possess the appropriate construction license, which the RFP required. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The Navy issued the RFP on June 8, 2007, seeking proposals to renovate the existing NEXMART building and to construct a new NEXMART building. The RFP provided that the contract would be awarded –to the offeror whose offer represents the best value to the Government,— and listed four equally-weighted non-price evaluation factors: organizational experience, organizational past performance, schedule, and safety. The non-price factors, taken as a whole, were to be approximately equal in importance to the fifth factor, price. Price proposals were to be figured in euros, and consistent with this, the RFP provided an –estimated cost range— for the scope of work, also priced in euros. The RFP cost estimate was between 2 million and 4 million euros. RFP at 1. The Navy's internal government cost estimate (which was not released to offerors) was 2,274,952. Contracting Officer's (CO) Statement at 2. The RFP provided that technical proposals should also include a certified copy of a particular type of Greek construction license: The offerors must be bearers of, and submit a certified copy of an updated Certificate of Classification issued by the Greek Ministry of Environment, Planning and Public Works covering the classification category under which they are licensed to undertake the construction of projects of cost value, type, and magnitude as this request for proposal. The certified copy must be provided with their proposal package. RFP at 11. HERA and the Navy agree that, under Greek law, the required certificates come in several classes, and that a class 3 certificate authorizes a firm to perform construction work valued up to 3,750,000, while a class 4 certificate permits work valued up to 7,500,000. Protest at 3; CO Statement at 2. The Navy received three proposals for the NEXMART construction and renovation project. The lowest price was proposed by Tsontos, with a total price of 1,709,000. Tsontos was also ranked highest by the technical evaluation panel under the non-price evaluation factors. CO Statement at 2. Tsontos submitted a copy of its class 3 certificate with its proposal. HERA's proposal was ranked third by the technical evaluation panel, and offered a price of 2,250,000. HERA submitted a class 4 certificate with its proposal. Id. at 3. Overall, the Navy's source selection board ranked Tsontos first, and HERA second. Since Tsontos was rated highest technically, and offered the lowest price, the CO selected Tsontos for award on that basis. After a requesting and receiving debriefing, HERA filed this protest. DISCUSSION HERA argues that the class 3 certificate provided by Tsontos does not meet the RFP's certificate requirement, and that Tsontos's proposal should have been rejected as unacceptable for that reason. HERA's argument is based on the cost estimate for this project in the RFP. Since the cost estimate was stated as a range from 2 million to 4 million euros, HERA argues that offerors had to have a certificate covering the entire range.