Vedetta 2 Mondialpol S.p.A. (W912PF21R0002)

B-420161 Dec 15, 2021 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Vedetta 2 Mondialpol S.p.A., of Como, Italy, protests the award of a contract to CIVIS S.p.A. of Vicenza, Italy under request for proposals (RFP) No. W912PF-21-R-0002, issued by the Department of the Army for non-personal armed security guard services. Vedetta argues, first, that the agency unreasonably evaluated its proposal as unacceptable, and second, that the solicitation did not describe the agency's requirements with sufficient clarity, even as amended. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Vedetta 2 Mondialpol S.p.A. File:  B-420161 Date:  December 15, 2021 Elena Iazzoni, Esq., Studio Legale Elena Iazzoni, for the protester. Major Weston E. Borkenhagen, Captain Timothy M. McLister, Andrew J. Smith, Esq., and Gregory O’Malley, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Hannah G. Barnes, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest that the agency unreasonably found the protester’s proposal unacceptable under the key personnel factor is denied where the protester fails to show that the agency’s evaluation is unreasonable or inconsistent with the terms of the solicitation. 2.  Protest that the evaluation was tainted by unclear solicitation terms is dismissed where the solicitation’s language is not patently ambiguous, and the protester did not protest the terms of the solicitation for lack of clarity or for ambiguity until after the closing time for receipt of proposals. DECISION Vedetta 2 Mondialpol S.p.A., of Como, Italy, protests the award of a contract to CIVIS S.p.A. of Vicenza, Italy under request for proposals (RFP) No. W912PF-21-R-0002, issued by the Department of the Army for non-personal armed security guard services.  Vedetta argues, first, that the agency unreasonably evaluated its proposal as unacceptable, and second, that the solicitation did not describe the agency’s requirements with sufficient clarity, even as amended.   We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On March 23, 2021, the agency issued the RFP pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation parts 12 (Acquisition of Commercial Items) and 15 (Contracting by Negotiation).  Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, RFP at 1.[1]  The RFP sought armed security guard services to protect and prevent unauthorized access to Army installations in Italy.  RFP at 50.  The RFP provided for award on a lowest-price, technically acceptable basis, considering price and the following non-price factors:  (1) key personnel; (2) experience; and (3) past performance.  RFP at 98.  The solicitation advised that the non-price factors would be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable, where a proposal that “does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation” would be assessed an unacceptable rating.  Id. at 98-99.  Among the non-price factors, only the key personnel factor is at issue here, under which the RFP provided that for the program manager, also referred to as the chief of guards, and the area manager, also referred to as the operations/training officer, proposals should “[i]nclude evidence of the following:  [m]inimum of five (5) years of security or law enforcement administration experience in the armed forces, civilian police, or commercial security agencies.”  Id. at 99.  The RFP advised that supervisors should provide evidence of a minimum of two years’ “experience acquired in the field of security or law enforcement administration. . . .”  Id.  The solicitation cautioned that award would be made on an “all or none” basis to the offeror that submitted the lowest-priced, technically acceptable proposal.  Id.