CJW-Desbuild JV, LLC

B-414219 Mar 17, 2017 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights CJW Desbuild JV, LLC, of McLean, Virginia, protests the failure of the Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) to award it a contract under request for proposals (RFP) No. N40080-16-R-0157, for construction services. The protester argues that the agency unreasonably rejected its proposal for failing to include a signed joint venture agreement. 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:  CJW-Desbuild JV, LLC File:  B-414219 Date:  March 17, 2017 Douglas L. Patin, Esq., Aron C. Beezley, Esq., and Lisa A. Markman, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for the protester. David A. Hearne, Esq., Outland, Gray, O’Keefe & Hubbard, for Ocean Construction Services, Inc., and Brian Hundertmark, Esq., Douglas A. Knight, Esq., and Eric S. Lammers, Esq., Garson Law LLC, for Edifice, LLC, the intervenors. Christine Tollefson, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Frank Maguire, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Where the protester failed to provide with its proposal a signed joint venture agreement, specifically required by the solicitation, the agency was not required to engage in clarifications to permit the protester to cure its failure to provide a required document. DECISION CJW Desbuild JV, LLC, of McLean, Virginia, protests the failure of the Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) to award it a contract under request for proposals (RFP) No. N40080-16-R-0157, for construction services.  The protester argues that the agency unreasonably rejected its proposal for failing to include a signed joint venture agreement. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP, issued on May 11, 2016, as a small business set-aside, provided for the award of up to six indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts for a base period of 12 months and two 1-year options.  RFP at 1.  Work to be performed under the contracts includes repairs, renovations, new construction and alterations to shore facilities, and utilities within NAVFAC Washington’s area of responsibility.  Id. at 20.  The RFP provided that award would be made “to the responsible Offeror(s) whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered.”  Id. at 11.  Non-price evaluation factors were construction experience, safety, and past performance.  Id. at 10.  The RFP provided that the technical factors, when combined, were of equal importance to past performance, and the technical factors and past performance, when combined, were approximately equal to price.  Id.  The solicitation advised offerors that the agency intended to evaluate proposals and make award without discussions. Of relevance to the protest here, the RFP instructed offerors as follows under the construction experience factor: If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity.  If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects shall be submitted for the Joint Venture members. . . . The Offeror shall submit a signed copy of the Joint Venture agreement indicating the proposed participation of each Joint Venture member.  Failure to submit the required Joint Venture Agreement will be considered unacceptable.  Id.