Voith Hydro, Inc. (W912EF-17-R-0004)

B-416243.5 Jan 31, 2020 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Voith Hydro, Inc. (Voith), of York, Pennsylvania, requests that our Office reconsider our decision in Voith Hydro, Inc.--Costs, B-416243.4, Jul. 30, 2019, 2019 CPD ¶ 272, in which we recommended that Voith be partially reimbursed for its claimed costs in filing and pursuing its protest challenging request for proposals No. W912EF-17-R-0004, issued by the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers (Corps), for the design, supply, and installation of turbines in several hydroelectric generator units at the McNary Lock and Dam Powerhouse located near Umatilla, Oregon. Voith argues that our decision erred by denying its request related to certain protest costs, as well as denying the protester's costs for filing a request for reimbursement of protest costs. We grant the request for reconsideration. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Voith Hydro, Inc.--Costs--Reconsideration File:  B-416243.5 Date:  January 31, 2020 David T. Ralston Jr., Esq., Frank S. Murray, Esq., and Micah Tal Zomer, Esq., Foley & Lardner LLP, for the protester. Theresa Hampson, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency.  Michael P. Grogan, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Request for reconsideration of prior decision denying a request for reimbursement of cost claim, in part, is granted where the requesting party has shown that our decision contains errors that warrant modification of that decision. DECISION   Voith Hydro, Inc. (Voith), of York, Pennsylvania, requests that our Office reconsider our decision in Voith Hydro, Inc.--Costs, B-416243.4, Jul. 30, 2019, 2019 CPD ¶ 272, in which we recommended that Voith be partially reimbursed for its claimed costs in filing and pursuing its protest challenging request for proposals No. W912EF-17-R-0004, issued by the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers (Corps), for the design, supply, and installation of turbines in several hydroelectric generator units at the McNary Lock and Dam Powerhouse located near Umatilla, Oregon.  Voith argues that our decision erred by denying its request related to certain protest costs, as well as denying the protester’s costs for filing a request for reimbursement of protest costs. We grant the request for reconsideration. BACKGROUND On April 9, 2018, Voith protested the award of a contract to Alstom Renewable US, LLC (Alstom), of Greenwood Village, Colorado, for the design, supply, and installation of turbines in 14 hydroelectric generator units at the McNary Lock and Dam Powerhouse.  Voith’s protest alleged that the agency unreasonably evaluated aspects of the technical proposals and the past performance submitted by Voith and Alstom, and that the Corps’ price realism analysis and best-value tradeoff decision were flawed.  Protest  (B-416243.1) at 24-41.  Subsequent to the receipt of the agency report, Voith filed a timely supplemental protest challenging additional aspects of the agency’s evaluation of technical proposals and past performance, while also raising new challenges to the agency’s best-value tradeoff decision.  Supp. Protest (B-416243.2) at 4-122. After development of the full protest record, which included the filing of an agency report, the above-referenced supplemental protest, a supplemental agency report, and the protester’s and intervenor’s comments, the Corps submitted a request for “outcome prediction” alternative dispute resolution (ADR), which the assigned GAO attorney agreed to provide.  During the course of that ADR, the GAO attorney advised the parties that our Office would likely sustain Voith’s protest on the basis that certain aspects of the agency’s evaluation of technical proposals and its evaluation of past performance were unreasonable, that the agency failed to conduct a price realism analysis as required by the solicitation, and that the source selection authority’s best-value tradeoff was not supported by the underlying evaluation record. In response to the ADR, the Corps informed our Office that it intended to reopen the procurement by conducting a comparative analysis of proposals with attention to technical proposals, reevaluating past performance, performing a price realism analysis based on the language in the solicitation, and making a new best-value determination.  Corrective Action Notice, July 3, 2018, at 1-2.  Based on the agency’s proposed corrective action, our Office dismissed Voith’s protest as academic.  Voith Hydro, Inc., B-416243; B-416243.2, July 9, 2018 (unpublished decision) at 1-2. On July 23, 2018, Voith filed its request for entitlement with our Office.[1]  Request for Reimbursement of Costs at 1; 4 C.F.R. § 21.8(e).