Souza Construction, Inc. (47PL0122R0022)

B-420966.4 Jan 11, 2023 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Souza Construction, Inc. (SCI), a Historically Underutilized Business Zone small business of Farmersville, California, protests the failure of the General Services Administration (GSA) to award it a contract under request for proposals (RFP) No. 47PL0122R0022, for construction and design/build services to support the installation of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) at federal locations throughout the United States. The protester argues that the agency's past performance and price evaluations were unreasonable. 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: Souza Construction, Inc. File: B-420966.4 Date: January 11, 2023 Lewis P. Rhodes, Esq., and Orest J. Jowyk, Esq., McMahon, Welch and Learned, PLLC, for the protester. Nicholas Solosky, Esq., Fox Rothschild LLP, for Southeastern Industrial Barlovento JV, an intervenor. Jessica Gunzel, Esq., and Bradley Boettcher, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency. Sarah T. Zaffina, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protester’s challenge of its neutral past performance rating is denied where the protester failed to submit required past performance questionnaires as directed by the solicitation and it has not demonstrated that the evaluation was unreasonable or inconsistent with the solicitation. DECISION Souza Construction, Inc. (SCI), a Historically Underutilized Business Zone small business of Farmersville, California, protests the failure of the General Services Administration (GSA) to award it a contract under request for proposals (RFP) No. 47PL0122R0022, for construction and design/build services to support the installation of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) at federal locations throughout the United States. The protester argues that the agency’s past performance and price evaluations were unreasonable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On March 17, 2022, GSA issued the solicitation as a small business set‑aside pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 19, as well as FAR part 15, contracting by negotiation. The solicitation sought proposals for a full spectrum of construction and design/build services for infrastructure improvements and installation of EVSE at federal locations‑‑both GSA‑controlled and non‑GSA‑controlled spaces‑‑nationwide. Agency Report (AR), Tab 5, RFP amend. 4 at 37.[1] The solicitation also stipulated that any federal agency may use the awarded contracts to procure the EVSE services. Id. The solicitation established four geographical zones (Zones A, B, C, and D), and contemplated the award of multiple fixed‑price indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts for each zone.[2] Id. Zone D is at issue in this protest.[3] The RFP provided that services under this procurement will be acquired through individual task order competitions. Id. The IDIQ contracts will have a 1‑year base period of performance and four 1‑year option periods. Id. at 96. The solicitation provided that the source selection decision would be based on a best‑value tradeoff between price and several non-price factors. Id. at 75. The RFP identified the following non-price factors, listed in descending order of importance: prior experience; past performance; management plan; and small business socioeconomic category.[4] Id. at 74. The RFP specified that the non-price factors, when combined, were significantly more important than price. Id. Under the prior experience factor, the solicitation instructed offerors to submit a maximum of four projects completed or substantially completed within six years of the proposal due date that were similar in nature to the work expected to be performed under the contracts here. Id. at 59. To facilitate the past performance evaluation, offerors were instructed to submit past performance questionnaires (PPQ) for each project included under the prior experience factor. Id. at 59‑60. The solicitation required offerors to use the PPQ form included as attachment A. Id. at 60. In response to 19 industry questions about whether the agency would accept other PPQ forms or types of information, such as Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) records, GSA expressly and repeatedly stated, “Offerors must submit ‘Attachment A Past Performance Questionnaire”. AR, Tab 2, RFP amend. 1 at 4‑5; AR, Tab 3, RFP amend. 2 at 9‑10, 12, 15; RFP amend. 4 at 26‑27, 31‑32, 35‑36. For the price evaluation, the solicitation provided that proposals would be evaluated for reasonableness and unbalanced pricing, and that each offeror’s total evaluated price would be used in the best‑value tradeoff analysis. Id.