RELYANT Global, LLC

B-413741 Nov 21, 2016 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights RELYANT Global, LLC, of Maryville, Tennessee, protests the award of a contract to Gear International, LLC, of Pensacola, Florida, under request for proposals (RFP) No. SP4510-16-R-0002, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for equipment repair and maintenance services in Bagram and Kandahar, Afghanistan. The protester asserts that the agency's past performance evaluation and the resulting award decision were unreasonable. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision 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:  RELYANT Global, LLC File:  B-413741 Date:  November 21, 2016 Donald M. Patton, for the protester. Kenneth Biles, for Gear International, LLC, the intervenor. Robin E. Walters, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency, for the agency. Kenneth Kilgour, Esq., and Laura Eyester, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency unreasonably evaluated past performance is denied where the record shows that the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation criteria. DECISION RELYANT Global, LLC, of Maryville, Tennessee, protests the award of a contract to Gear International, LLC, of Pensacola, Florida, under request for proposals (RFP) No. SP4510-16-R-0002, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for equipment repair and maintenance services in Bagram and Kandahar, Afghanistan.  The protester asserts that the agency’s past performance evaluation and the resulting award decision were unreasonable.  We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP, issued on April 29, 2016, sought proposals for the award of single fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract to the offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the government, considering past performance and price, with past performance significantly more important than price.  RFP at 18, 59.  The RFP requires the contractor to provide preventive maintenance and repairs for all material handling equipment and unscheduled maintenance and repairs for specified equipment at two locations in Afghanistan--Bagram and Kandahar.  Id. at 3.  The independent government estimate (IGE) of the value of the contract for the base and two option periods was $[DELETED].  Agency Report (AR), Tab 14, Simplified Acquisition Award Documentation, at 1.  With respect to past performance, offerors were to identify up to three government or commercial projects “for the same or similar services for performance in Afghanistan within the last 2 years.”  RFP at 16.  The RFP advised offerors that their description of the work performed must be sufficient to explain how each reference was the same or similar to the requirements of the solicitation in areas such as performance timeframes, performance in Afghanistan, managing a similar size workforce, and complexities of services.  Id. at 17.  In addition, the RFP required offerors to provide a past performance survey, set forth in an attachment to the RFP, to the past performance references identified in the proposal, and the past performance reference was required to independently submit the survey to the contracting officer.  Id.  The RFP stated that the government may consider information obtained from other sources but that it would not contact references for purposes of obtaining the survey.  Id. The RFP stated the agency would evaluate past performance on an adjectival scale and that the assessment of the offeror’s past performance would be used as a means of evaluating the offeror’s probability of success.  RFP at 17.  The RFP provided that the “offered price will be used in conjunction with the other factors to determine the proposal which represents the best value to the Government.  Price will not be numerically scored, but it will be fully evaluated using price evaluation techniques.”  Id. at 18.  In addition, the RFP stated the government would evaluate price by adding the total price for the base requirement and all options, and may determine an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are materially unbalanced.  Id. at 48.  The protester, the awardee, and 14 other firms submitted proposals.  AR, Tab 13, Competitive Range Determination, at 1.  Three of the 16 proposals, including those of the protester and the awardee, were given ratings of substantial confidence under past performance.  Id. Gear’s past performance proposal identified three contracts, all of which were for work performed in Afghanistan; at least one of these contracts had a value higher than the IGE here.  AR, Tab 6, Gear Past Performance Evaluation, at 1; Tab 4, Gear Vol.