Battistella SPA

B-416597.4 Jan 24, 2019 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Battistella S.p.A., of Vincenza, Italy, protests the agency's failure to award the firm a contract under request for proposals (RFP) No. W912PF-18-R-0003, issued by the Department of the Army for a multiple-award task order contract (MATOC) to provide design-build and design-bid-build construction services in Vincenza, Italy. Battistella alleges that the agency unreasonably evaluated its proposal and improperly made its source selection decision. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of: Battistella S.p.A. File: B-416597.4 Date: January 24, 2019 Monica Battistella, Battistella S.p.A., for the protester. Richard B. Oliver, Esq., Glenn Sweatt, Esq., and J. Matthew Carter, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, for Environmental Chemical Corporation Italy srl, the intervenor. Major Ronald Herrmann, Department of the Army, for the agency. Todd C. Culliton, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest is denied where the agency's evaluation and source selection decision were consistent with the terms of the solicitation and applicable procurement statutes and regulations. DECISION Battistella S.p.A., of Vincenza, Italy, protests the agency's failure to award the firm a contract under request for proposals (RFP) No. W912PF-18-R-0003, issued by the Department of the Army for a multiple-award task order contract (MATOC) to provide design-build and design-bid-build construction services in Vincenza, Italy. Battistella alleges that the agency unreasonably evaluated its proposal and improperly made its source selection decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP, issued on April 5, 2018, contemplated the award of up to five indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts for design-build and design-bid-build construction services to support the U.S. Army Garrison Vincenza mission. Contracting Officer's Statement of Facts (COS) at 1; RFP at 6, 65. The selected contractors would be required to construct a new chiller, cooling tower, and associated pumps. Statement of Work (SOW) at 2. Each contract would be performed over a 1-year base period and four 1-year option periods. RFP at 7. The MATOC had a ceiling of $49 million, and any awarded task order contract had a minimum guarantee of $10,000. Id. Proposals were to be evaluated on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering the following factors, listed in descending order of importance: past experience (i.e., technical), past performance, organization, and price. Id. at 72-75. Nineteen offerors, including Battistella, submitted proposals prior to the May 15 closing date. Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 10. The agency evaluated Battistella's proposal as having a purple/good rating for the past experience factor, a very relevant/satisfactory confidence rating for the past performance factor, and a purple/good rating for the organization factor.1 AR, Tab 16, Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD), at 7-17. The source selection authority (SSA) determined that Battistella did not offer the best value to the agency because its lower-level Societa Organismi D'Attestazione (SOA) certifications2 indicated a lower performance capability and its organization chart was confusing. Id. at 25. The SSA also noted that Battistella's inability to relate its construction experience to the solicitation requirements was troubling because it suggested that Battistella did not understand the technical requirements. Id. at 22. After the agency notified Battistella that its proposal was not selected for award, Battistella filed the instant protest. DISCUSSION Battistella alleges that the agency unreasonably evaluated its proposal under the past experience, past performance, and organization factors. Battistella also alleges that the agency improperly made its source selection decision. We have considered all of the allegations raised and find no basis to sustain the protest. We discuss Battistella's principal allegations below, but note, at the outset that, in reviewing protests challenging an agency's evaluation of proposals, our Office does not reevaluate proposals or substitute our judgment for that of the agency; rather, we review the record to determine whether the agency's evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation's evaluation criteria, as well as applicable statutes and regulations. SaxmanOne, LLC, B-414748, B-414748.3, Aug. 22, 2017, 2017 CPD ¶ 264 at 3. Past Experience The past experience factor was comprised of three subfactors: construction experience, design experience, and SOA certification.