B-310372.3, Pemco Aeroplex, Inc., June 13, 2008

B-310372.3 Jun 13, 2008 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Pemco Aeroplex, Inc. protests the Department of the Air Force's selection of Boeing Aerospace Operations, Inc. for award of a contract pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8105-05-R-0014 to provide programmed depot maintenance (PDM) for KC-135 aircraft. We deny the protest. View Decision B-310372.3, Pemco Aeroplex, Inc., June 13, 2008 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: Pemco Aeroplex, Inc. File: B-310372.3 Date: June 13, 2008 David R. Hazelton, Esq., Roger S. Goldman, Esq., Kyle R. Jefcoat, Esq., and Benjamin Wei, Esq., Latham & Watkins LLP, for the protester. Rand L. Allen, Esq., Paul F. Khoury, Esq., Scott M. McCaleb, Esq., Kara M. Sacilotto, Esq., Nicole P. Wishart, Esq., and William J. Grimaldi, Esq., Wiley Rein, LLP, for The Boeing Company, an intervenor. Brent G. Curtis, Esq., and Kenneth C. Kitzmiller, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., and Ralph O. White, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. In responding to this Office's prior decision that sustained a previous protest and recommended that the agency perform and document a price realism and proposal risk analysis as contemplated by the solicitation, the agency was not required to reopen discussions with offerors to perform the necessary analysis. 2. Agency's record documenting its various judgments and analysis regarding the impact of awardee's final proposal revisions reasonably supports the agency's conclusions with regard to price realism and proposal risk and complies with solicitation requirements. DECISION Pemco Aeroplex, Inc.[1] protests the Department of the Air Force's selection of Boeing Aerospace Operations, Inc. for award of a contract pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8105-05-R-0014 to provide programmed depot maintenance (PDM) for KC-135 aircraft.[2] We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The solicitation was initially issued in August 2005 and, thereafter, was amended several times. As amended, the solicitation provided for award on a –best value— basis and established the following evaluation factors: mission capability, proposal risk, past performance and cost/price. RFP at 78-79. With regard to proposal evaluations under the mission capability factor, the solicitation established various subfactors and provided that color ratings would be assigned at the subfactor level.[3] With regard to evaluation of proposal risk, the solicitation provided that risk assessments of –low,— –moderate,— or –high— would be made for each of the mission capability subfactors, and provided that these risk assessments would consider each offeror's proposed approach with regard to –the potential for disruption of schedule, increased cost, degradation of performance, and the need for increased Government oversight, as well as the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.— Id. at 82-83. Finally, with regard to evaluation of cost/price, the solicitation contemplated award of a fixed-price contract. Nonetheless, section M of the solicitation provided that the agency would perform a price realism analysis based, in part, on data offerors were required to submit, including data regarding –labor, fringe benefits, overhead and G&A rates by year for all labor categories anticipated for use in the performance of this effort.— RFP at 86. In September 2006, Pemco and Boeing each submitted initial proposals for the requirements at issue.[4] Boeing's initial proposal reflected [deleted][5].[6] Following receipt and review of initial proposals, the agency conducted discussions with each offeror. During discussions, the agency requested that Boeing explain [deleted]. Boeing responded that [deleted]. Thereafter, final proposal revisions (FPR) were requested and submitted in February 2007; notwithstanding its response to the agency during discussions, Boeing's FPR [deleted].[7] AR, Tab 27, FPR, at V3-57.