R A Burch Construction Company, Inc. (W912PL-21-R-0005)

B-420301.2 Mar 29, 2022 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights R.A. Burch Construction Company, Inc., of Ramona, California, protests the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers' award of a contract to The Korte Company, of St. Louis, Missouri, pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. W912-PL-21-R-0005, for the design and construction of a flight test engineering laboratory (FTEL) at Edwards Air Force Base, California. Burch challenges the agency's past performance evaluation and its best-value tradeoff determination. 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: R. A. Burch Construction Company, Inc. File: B-420301.2 Date: March 29, 2022 David S. Demian, Esq., Finch, Thornton & Baird, LLP, for the protester. Daniel M. Aspinwall, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Glenn G. Wolcott, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Agency reasonably determined that awardee’s past performance, which included performance of requirements that were “essentially the same” as those solicited, was superior to protester’s past performance, which reflected performance of requirements that were similar to, but not “essentially the same” as, those solicited. 2. Agency reasonably concluded that awardee’s superiority with regard to non-price evaluation factors outweighed the protester’s slight price advantage. DECISION R.A. Burch Construction Company, Inc., of Ramona, California, protests the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers’ award of a contract to The Korte Company, of St. Louis, Missouri, pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. W912-PL-21-R-0005, for the design and construction of a flight test engineering laboratory (FTEL) at Edwards Air Force Base, California.[1] Burch challenges the agency’s past performance evaluation and its best-value tradeoff determination. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On May 4, 2021, the agency issued RFP No. W912-PL-21-R-0005, seeking fixed-price proposals to design and construct an FTEL complex.[2] The solicitation provided for a best-value source selection decision based on a tradeoff between price[3] and the following non-price evaluation factors: (1) past performance of construction contractor;[4] (2) past performance of lead design firm; (3) technical approach; (4) management plan; (5) proposed schedule;[5] and (6) small business participation.[6] The solicitation provided that: non-price factors 1 through 5 were of equal importance, and each was more important than factor 6, small business participation; non-price factors, combined, were approximately equal in importance to price; and “as differences in price become less distinct, differences in ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages between proposals are of increased importance.” Id. at 68, 85. On or before the June 17, 2021 closing date for receipt of proposals, five offerors submitted proposals. Thereafter, the agency conducted discussions; sought final proposal revisions; and evaluated the final revised proposals of Korte and Burch as follows (the evaluation of the other three offerors is not relevant here):   Korte Burch Past Performance (Construction Contractor) Substantial Confidence Satisfactory Confidence Past Performance (Lead Design Firm) Satisfactory Confidence Satisfactory Confidence Technical Approach Good Good Management Plan Good Good Proposed Schedule Good Good Small Business Acceptable Outstanding Total Evaluated Price $39,857,938 $39,805,820   AR, exh. 25, First Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD) at 16. On September 28, 2021, the agency selected Korte for award. On October 15, following a debriefing, Burch filed a protest with our Office challenging that award; among other things, the protest challenged the agency’s evaluation of past performance and its best-value tradeoff determination. AR, exh. 32, Initial Burch Protest at 1. On November 10, the agency stated that it would take corrective action by reevaluating the proposals “to ensure the evaluation was done in accordance with the solicitation” and, thereafter, would “issue a new best value tradeoff determination.” AR, exh. 36, Notice of Corrective Action at 1. Based on the agency’s corrective action, we dismissed Burch’s October 15 protest. Subsequently, the source selection evaluation board (SSEB) reevaluated the proposals, but made no changes to the ratings or evaluated prices shown in the table above. See AR, exh. 40, Final SSDD at 26. Thereafter, the source selection authority (SSA)[7] independently reviewed the procurement record. Id. at 16.