B-311200; B-311200.2, Joint Venture Penauille/BMAR & Associates, LLC, May 12, 2008

B-311200; B-311200.2, Joint Venture Penauille/BMAR & Associates, LLC, May 12, 2008 TITLE: B-311200; B-311200.2, Joint Venture Penauille/BMAR & Associates, LLC, May 12, 2008 BNUMBER: B-311200; B-311200.2 DATE: May 12, 2008 ********************************************************************************** B-311200; B-311200.2, Joint Venture Penauille/BMAR & Associates, LLC, May 12, 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: Joint Venture Penauille/BMAR & Associates, LLC File: B-311200; B-311200.2 Date: May 12, 2008 T. Wayne Gray, Esq., Joseph P. Hornyak, Esq., and Megan M. Mocho, Esq., Holland & Knight LLP, for the protester. Philip J. Davis, Esq., William A. Roberts, III, Esq., Jon W. Burd, Esq., John R. Prairie, Esq., and Lina D. Soni, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, for Team BOS Sigonella, an intervenor. Amy M. Steed, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Charles W. Morrow, Esq., Sharon L. Larkin, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging price evaluation is sustained, where the procuring agency unreasonably determined that the protester's lower-priced line items for a small portion of the work created an "extremely high" performance risk and based its decision on an erroneous belief that the contractor could reject work that was ordered. DECISION Joint Venture Penauille/BMAR & Associates, LLC (JVPB) protests the award of a contract to Team BOS Sigonella (BOS) under request for proposals (RFP) No. N33191-07-R-0221, issued by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Europe and Support Services, for facilities support services. JVPB contends that the Navy improperly rejected its proposal as being unreasonably low in price. We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP sought to procure "Base Operating and Support Services" at the Naval Air Station in Sigonella, Italy, under a fixed-price contract, with a combination of fixed-quantity and indefinite-quantity line items. The period of performance included a 45-day phase-in period, 1-year base period, and four 1-year option periods.[1] RFP sect. F.1. The selected contractor was required to provide facility support, management and administration, and environmental services that were identified in the performance work statement (PWS). The facility support services included facility investment, janitorial services, pest control services, refuse collection and recycling, "Other (Minor Work)," grounds maintenance, street sweeping, and shuttle bus services. Id. sect. C, PWS, at 1. At issue in this protest is the minor work requirement of the facility support services, which the RFP defined as follows: Minor work orders are used for minor construction, fabrication, alteration, maintenance, repairs, special events support and office moves requiring no more than EUR [Euros] 10,000 in labor, materials and equipment. Example of minor work jobs are: minor construction, special event site preparation, replace fire alarm panels, replace pumps, replace carpet, replace tiles, furniture moving, pump out man hole, etc. . . . . Id. at 40. Minor work was further classified as either "priority" or "routine," although neither term was identified in the RFP. The work was also grouped into "categories" based solely on the value of the work to be performed. Id. Included with the RFP was an "Exhibit Line Item" (ELIN) schedule. For each of the required services in the PWS, including minor work, the ELIN schedule identified fixed-quantity and indefinite-quantity line items for which the offerors were to provide unit and total prices for identified or estimated quantities of work.[2] For minor work, the "[p]erformance standards" for both fixed-quantity and indefinite-quantity work were the same, except that offerors were guaranteed an identified quantity of fixed-quantity work, and indefinite-quantity work would only be ordered "if and when needed." Id. at 43. With regard to minor work, the ELIN schedule for fixed-quantity work provided as follows (while we list here the categories for "priority" work, the categories for "routine" work were identical): Category I, Priority Minor Work (from EUR 0.01 to EUR 2,000.00) Category II, Priority Minor Work (from EUR 2,000.01 to EUR 5,000.00) Category III, Priority Minor Work (from EUR 5,000.01 to EUR 7,500.00) Category IV, Priority Minor Work (from EUR 7,500.01 to EUR 10,000.00) RFP, attach. J-0200000-1.1, ELIN Schedule, at 10.