Far North Forestry LLC

B-417502.2 Sep 25, 2019 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Far North Forestry, LLC (Far North), a small business of Girdwood, Alaska, protests the award of a contract to PEAK Engineering LLC, a small business of Sitka, Alaska, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 12012018Q0011, issued by the Department of Agriculture, United States Forest Service (Forest Service), for timber cruise data collection services. The protester challenges the agency's evaluation of quotations and argues that the best-value tradeoff decision was flawed. We dismiss the protest in part and deny it in part. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Far North Forestry, LLC File:  B-417502.2 Date:  September 25, 2019 Daniel Tumenas, Far North Forestry LLC, for the protester. Antonio Robinson, Esq., Department of Agriculture, for the agency. Christopher Alwood, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest challenging the terms of the solicitation is dismissed as untimely where the alleged solicitation improprieties were apparent from the solicitation but were not protested prior to the closing time for submitting quotations. 2.  Protest challenging selection of lower-rated, lower-priced quotation is denied where the source selection authority considered the differences between the two vendors’ quotations but determined that the superiority of the higher-rated, higher-priced quotation was not worth paying the associated price premium. DECISION Far North Forestry, LLC (Far North), a small business of Girdwood, Alaska, protests the award of a contract to PEAK Engineering LLC, a small business of Sitka, Alaska, under request for quotations (RFQ)[1] No. 12012018Q0011, issued by the Department of Agriculture, United States Forest Service (Forest Service), for timber cruise data collection services.[2]  The protester challenges the agency’s evaluation of quotations and argues that the best-value tradeoff decision was flawed. We dismiss the protest in part and deny it in part. BACKGROUND The Forest Service issued the RFQ on March 5, 2019, under the commercial item procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12.  AR, Tab 4, RFQ at 1.  The agency conducted the procurement under the simplified acquisition procedures of FAR part 13.  AR, Tab 3, Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 2.  The RFQ contemplated the award of a fixed-price contract for timber cruising services of 8,789 acres of land in Alaska.  RFQ at 1-4.  The RFQ required the agency to evaluate quotations under three non-price evaluation factors, in descending order of importance: (1) Experience and qualifications to perform work; to include c[r]uising old growth and familiarity with Southeast Alaska tree species. (2) Capacity to perform work within period of performance. (3) Past performance. RFQ at 12.  The solicitation established that non-price evaluation factors, when combined, were of equal importance to price.  Id.  Award was to be made based on a best‑value tradeoff.  AR, Tab 9, New Award Decision at 2.  The Forest Service received questions about the procurement from vendors and, on March 22, 2019, published its responses on the FedBizOpps website.  See https://www.fbo.gov/spg/USDA/FS/109/12012018Q0011/listing.html (last visited on September 20, 2019).[3]  In response to one question about certification of timber cruisers, the agency stated, “[t]his project does not require that all timber cruisers be certified.”  RFQ at 44. The agency received four timely-submitted quotations, including ones from Far North and PEAK.  See AR, Tab 7 Consensus Evaluation.  The agency found that there was no meaningful qualitative difference between the offerors’ technical quotations, but found that Far North had superior past performance when compared to PEAK.  AR Tab 8, Consensus Evaluation Summary at 2-3.  Far North’s proposed price was $624,500, while PEAK proposed a price of $422,637.  AR, Tab 7, Consensus Evaluation.  In its review of prices, the Forest Service concluded that PEAK’s proposed price implied a lack of understanding of the resources needed to complete the requirements; specifically, the amount of charter helicopter time needed, which would lead to “higher post-award expenses through Modification.”  Id.; AR Tab 8, Consensus Evaluation Summary at 3. On April 10, 2019, based on the initial evaluation of the quotations received, the Forest Service awarded a contract to Far North in the amount of $624,000.[4]  Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 2.  On April 21, 2019, PEAK Engineering, LLC filed a protest with our Office, challenging the April 10 award to Far North.  Id.  On May 22, 2019, the Forest Service notified our Office that it had identified concerns about the procurement[5] and intended to take corrective action by re-evaluating the already submitted quotations, making a new award decision, and terminating Far North’s con...