Air Borealis Limited Partnership (FA4890-22-R-0007)

B-420637,B-420637.2 Jun 29, 2022 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Air Borealis Limited Partnership, of Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, protests the award of a contract to Kenn Borek Air Ltd. (KBA), of Calgary, Canada, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA4890-22-R-0007, issued by the Department of the Air Force for fixed-wing aircraft services in Canada. The protester challenges the agency's evaluation of 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: Air Borealis Limited Partnership File: B-420637; B-420637.2 Date: June 29, 2022 Tyler Evans, Esq., and Paul Rowley, Esq., Covington & Burling, LLP, for the protester. Colonel Frank Yoon, Major Alissa J. Schrider, Sandy Caruco, Esq., and Kevin P. Stiens, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Kenneth Kilgour, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s technical evaluation is denied where the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Air Borealis Limited Partnership, of Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, protests the award of a contract to Kenn Borek Air Ltd. (KBA), of Calgary, Canada, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA4890-22-R-0007, issued by the Department of the Air Force for fixed-wing aircraft services in Canada.[1] The protester challenges the agency’s evaluation of technical proposals. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The solicitation seeks to combine two contracts to provide fixed-wing aircraft services to transport cargo between five zones of the North Warning System in support of an early-warning radar system that provides airspace surveillance across North America’s polar region. Agency Report (AR), Tab 4, Conformed RFP (RFP), Performance Work Statement (PWS) at 1-6. Air Borealis is the incumbent contractor for zone 5; KBA is the incumbent contractor for the other four zones.[2] Protest at 12. Award would be made to the offeror whose proposal represented the best value to the Air Force as determined by a tradeoff considering two factors--technical capability/risk and price.[3] Id. at 14-17. The technical capability/risk factor contained four subfactors: fixed-wing capacity and distance requirements; managing utilization across the zones; operations; and plans. Id. at 14. The first two subfactors--fixed-wing capacity and distance requirements, and managing utilization across the zones--were the most important subfactors and would receive separate technical and risk ratings.[4] Id. at 14-15. The two remaining subfactors--operations and plans--would be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable and would not be considered in the best-value tradeoff analysis. Id. at 14. An unacceptable rating on one or more subfactors would render a proposal ineligible for award. Id. The RFP advised offerors that, “[i]f an offeror’s proposal demonstrates a material failure to meet a Government requirement, this is a deficiency in the offeror’s proposal resulting in a Red/Unacceptable rating and the proposal is not awardable.”[5] Id. at 14. The four subfactors contained various aspects. As relevant to this protest, the plans subfactor contained three aspects; the second aspect was a transition plan. Id. at 16. Under the transition plan, proposals were to “demonstrate[ ] a comprehensive approach that describes, in detail, how the Contractor will be on-station and able to accomplish missions the first day of the performance period.” Id. Air Borealis and KBA submitted the only two proposals. See AR, Tab 12, Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) Report at 8. The Air Force evaluated Air Borealis’s proposal as unacceptable under the transition plan aspect of the plans subfactor, with an overall subfactor rating of unacceptable. [6] Id. at 14-15. The agency found that the protester’s proposal “did not meet the evaluation criteria in the ‘Transition Plan’ aspect by not directly addressing how [Air Borealis] would be able to base assets outside of zone 5.” Id. at 14. The agency noted that, while “[s]everal references were made to hangers and services being made available once the contract was awarded,” Air Borealis’s proposal provided “no specific information” regarding “when and how [the hangers and services] would be obtained.” Id. Moreover, the Air Force found that the protester’s proposed phase-in plan “does not contain specific information on how the bidder plans to populate zones with aircraft, personnel and the support equipment required to execute the Logistic Support Site (LSS) basing concept.” Id. at 15.