Kiewit Infrastructure West Company (N62478-21-F-4079)

B-419687,B-419687.2 Jun 25, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Kiewit Infrastructure West Company, of Honolulu, Hawaii, protests the issuance of a task order to Hensel Phelps Construction Company, under request for proposals (RFP) No. N62478-20-D-4003/4004/4005/4006/4007/4014/4015, issued by the Department of the Navy for repair, design, and conversion of existing facilities into administrative facilities in Oahu, Hawaii. Kiewit challenges the agency's evaluation of Hensel's price and technical proposals. 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:  Kiewit Infrastructure West Company File:  B-419687; B-419687.2 Date:  June 25, 2021 Douglas L. Patin, Esq., Aron C. Beezley, Esq., and Lisa A. Markman, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for the protester. Jacob W. Scott, Esq., Alexander Gorelik, Esq., and Erik M. Coon, Esq., Smith, Currie & Hancock, LLP, for Hensel Phelps Construction Company, the intervenor. Lauren Kalaukoa, Esq., Mark Morita, Esq., and Jan E. Takamine, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Kasia Dourney, Esq., and Evan C. Williams, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest alleging that the awardee’s proposal took exception to the requirement to propose a fixed price by offering a discount for one of the line items is denied where the solicitation did not prohibit offerors from proposing a discount and where the awardee was bound toperform at its discounted price. 2.  Protest alleging that the awardee’s pricingis unbalanced is denied where the protester fails to make the threshold showing that the agency failed to evaluate the risk of unbalanced pricing, and where the agency reasonably determined that the risk of unbalanced pricing was low. DECISION   Kiewit Infrastructure West Company, of Honolulu,Hawaii, protests the issuance of a task order to Hensel Phelps Construction Company, under request for proposals (RFP) No. N62478-20-D-4003/4004/4005/4006/4007/4014/4015, issuedby theDepartment of the Navy forrepair, design, and conversion of existing facilities into administrative facilities in Oahu, Hawaii.  Kiewit challenges the agency’s evaluation of Hensel’s price and technical proposals. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On November 17, 2020, the agency issued the RFP to holders ofthe Navy’s multiple-award construction contractfordesign-build and design-bid-build construction projects in Oahu, Hawaii.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 2, RFP at 1-2.  The construction projects contemplated under the solicitation included the repair of existing space, design and construction of various administrativefacilities, and remediationwork for hazardous materials.  Id. at 5; AR, Tab 1, Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1.  The Navy anticipated award of a fixed-price task order to the responsible offeror with the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standardsfor the following non-price evaluationfactors: technical approach, experience, and pastperformance. RFP at 23-28.  The RFP instructed that proposals would be evaluated for acceptabilitybut not ranked; to be eligible foraward, all non‑price evaluation factors must have beenrated “acceptable.”  Id. at 24.  Relevant here, offerors were instructed to submit prices for 14 contract line item numbers (CLINs) in the solicitation’s schedule, including for separate work areas A through J, corresponding to 10 separate CLINs.  Id. at 431-32; AR, Tab 4, RFP amend.6 at 2-3.  Additionally, the RFP provided for four CLINs that allowed the agency to accelerate the “beneficial occupancy date” for particular project areas by 30 days each.  AR, Tab 4, RFP amend. 6 at 3.  Of particular importance, for those accelerated completion CLINs, including CLIN 0001AK, at issue in this protest, offerors were advised to “[p]rovide [a] cost which is solely attributable to accelerating delivery” of that particular project area.[1]  Id. at 3.  The RFP further stated that “[f]ailure to provide an offer on all items in the proposal schedule may cause the offeror to be considered nonresponsive.”  Id.  Award was to be “based on the [t]otal [p]rice” for all 14 CLINS, and the price was to be evaluated for reasonableness.[2]  Id.  The solicitation provided for a four-phase construction schedule.  AR, Tab 4, RFP amend. 6 at 9-10.  In phase 1, the awardee had to finalize the design, and obtain agency approval, within 210 days of the contract award.  Id. at 9.  Phases 2 and 3 provided for completion of the work under the requirement, including under the accelerated completion CLINs.  Id.