Shimmick Construction Company, Inc. (W912QR21R0075)

B-420419.2 May 09, 2022 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Shimmick Construction Company, Inc., of Oakland, California, protests the award of a contract to C.J. Mahan Construction Company, LLC, of Columbus, Ohio, under request for proposal (RFP) No. W912QR21R0075, issued by the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, for dam maintenance support services at Olmsted Locks and Dam in Olmsted, Illinois. Shimmick argues that the agency's evaluation of its past performance and technical proposal was unreasonable, contrary to the solicitation, and motivated by bias. The protester also challenges the agency's discussions and best-value tradeoff decision. 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: Shimmick Construction Company, Inc. File: B-420419.2 Date: May 9, 2022 Giovanni M. Ruscitti, Esq., Justin C. Berg, Esq., Jack P. Storti, Esq., Benjamin F. Silfen, Esq., Berg Hill Greenleaf Ruscitti LLP, for the protester. Lawrence M. Prosen, Esq., Benjamin L. Williams, Esq., and Josephine M. Bahn, Esq., Cozen O’Connor, for C.J. Mahan Construction Company, LLC, the intervenor. Elisabeth A. Dixon, Esq., Matthew R. Keiser, Esq., and Tarrah M. Beavin, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Uri R. Yoo, Esq., and Alexander O. Levine, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging the agency’s consideration of the protester’s past performance on an ongoing project, retrieved from the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System, is denied where the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 2. Protest alleging that agency’s discussions were misleading and not meaningful is denied where the agency was not required to discuss adverse past performance information to which the offeror has had an opportunity to respond. 3. Protest alleging bias is denied where the protester failed to provide convincing evidence of bad faith and instead relied upon inferences drawn from the existence of an ongoing dispute. 4. Protest challenging the agency’s technical evaluation is denied where the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 5. Protest challenging the agency’s tradeoff decision is denied where the decision was supported by a qualitative comparison of proposals and adequately documented. DECISION Shimmick Construction Company, Inc., of Oakland, California, protests the award of a contract to C.J. Mahan Construction Company, LLC, of Columbus, Ohio, under request for proposal (RFP) No. W912QR21R0075, issued by the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, for dam maintenance support services at Olmsted Locks and Dam in Olmsted, Illinois. Shimmick argues that the agency’s evaluation of its past performance and technical proposal was unreasonable, contrary to the solicitation, and motivated by bias. The protester also challenges the agency’s discussions and best‑value tradeoff decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the solicitation on September 13, 2021, for support services necessary to perform all operations associated with lifting and setting a dive deflector box at Olmsted Locks and Dam in Olmsted, Illinois. RFP at 7.[1] The contractor would support the maintenance operation performed by agency personnel by “anchoring and positioning the floating plant, transporting a dive deflector box weighing 62 tons, picking and setting the dive deflector box in slack water with dam raised, moving the government dam-raising floating plant across and around wicket holes, and underwater excavation.” Id. The RFP contemplated award of a fixed-price contract for a base period of 89 days for a modified high-water season, with nine alternating option periods consisting of five 7‑month periods for low‑water seasons (May through November) and four 5-month periods for high-water seasons (December through April). Id. at 5. The solicitation advised offerors that award would be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal is determined to represent the best overall value to the government, when all factors were considered. Id. at 58. Proposals would be evaluated considering the following three non-price factors, listed in descending order of importance: (1) past performance; (2) technical; and (3) small business participation plan. Id. at 61. The technical factor consisted of three subfactors, listed in descending order of importance: (a) winch and anchor line loads and factors of safety; (b) trench cleaning schedule and process; and (c) approaches to lateral and up/downstream movement. Id.