Design Industry, LLC

B-414816 Sep 22, 2017 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Design Industry LLC (DIL), of Maywood, New Jersey, protests the award of a lease to Greater Berks Development Fund (Berks), of Reading, Pennsylvania, under request for lease proposals (RLP) No. 5PA0378, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA), Public Buildings Service, for office space. The protester challenges the agency's evaluation of its technical proposal. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Design Industry LLC File:  B-414816 Date:  September 22, 2017 Filip Kristani for the protester. G. Thompson Bell III, Esq., Stevens & Lee, for Greater Berks Development Fund, the intervenor. Robert Notigan, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency. Pedro E. Briones, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the technical evaluation of the protester’s lease proposal is denied where the record establishes that the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation’s technical specifications and evaluation criteria. DECISION Design Industry LLC (DIL), of Maywood, New Jersey, protests the award of a lease to Greater Berks Development Fund (Berks), of Reading, Pennsylvania, under request for lease proposals (RLP) No. 5PA0378, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA), Public Buildings Service, for office space.  The protester challenges the agency’s evaluation of its technical proposal. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RLP was provided to four potential lessors on September 13, 2016, and sought proposals for 32,011 ABOA[1] square feet of office space within the central business district of Reading, Pennsylvania, to house federal district and bankruptcy courts and offices of the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS).  Lease Contracting Officer’s Statement (LCOS) ¶ 1; RLP §§ 1.02.A, 1.03, 5.02.  The solicitation provided for a 10‑year lease term with a 5‑year renewal option and stated that award would be based on a best‑value tradeoff among four evaluation factors:  past performance and customer satisfaction, security, layout, and price.  RLP §§ 1.02.F, 4.04.B‑C.  The RLP stated that the non‑price factors were of equal importance and, when combined, were approximately equal to the price factor.  Id. § 4.04.B. The RLP specified, among other things, a number of minimum security requirements and “preferred/ideal” security parameters, and required offerors to submit a security plan and test fit layout for their proposed space.  Id. §§ 3.06.K.b‑c; 5.  Offerors were advised that the agency may conduct negotiations and that all offerors within the competitive range would be provided a reasonable opportunity to submit revisions to their initial proposal, including any cost or price, technical, or other revisions that may result from negotiations.  Id. § 4.01. GSA received lease proposals from two offerors:  Berks and DIL.  LCOS ¶ 5.  DIL had recently purchased, and proposed for lease, the incumbent building space.  See Protest at 1.  Proposals were evaluated by a source selection evaluation board (SSEB) and, after initial evaluations, the lease contracting officer conducted written and verbal discussions with both offerors.  LCOS ¶ 5; see, e.g., AR, Exh. B, DIL Discussions (Disc.), at 1‑4.  The agency received and evaluated revised proposals and subsequently requested best and final offers (BAFOs).  See LCOS ¶¶ 9‑12; AR, Exh. K, Price Negotiation Mem. (PNM), at 9‑10; Exh. G, DIL BAFO Req., Mar. 24, 2017, at 1‑2. The source selection authority (SSA) for the procurement found that Berks’ final lease proposal met all RLP requirements and most of the ideal/preferred criteria.[2]  LCOS ¶ 17; AR, Exh. K, PNM, at 12.  By contrast, the SSA agreed with the SSEB’s assessment that DIL’s final proposal failed to meet the RLP’s minimum security requirements and proposed an unacceptable security plan, as discussed below.  AR, Exh.