Desbuild Incorporated (19AQMM21R0001)

B-421742,B-421742.2,B-421742.3,B-421742.4,B-421742.5,B-421742.6 Sep 19, 2023 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Desbuild Incorporated, of Hyattsville, Maryland, and Framaco-Bozdemir Joint Venture, LLC (FBJV), of Rye Brook, New York, protest the award of a contract to Sicra Ile de France (Sicra), of Ile-De-France, France, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 19AQMM21R0001, issued by the Department of State (DOS), for the construction of a new residential facility in Paris, France. The protesters claim that the agency's evaluation of the awardee's proposal and the source selection decision were unreasonable. The protesters also challenge various aspects of the evaluations of their own proposals. We deny the protests. 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: Desbuild Incorporated; Framaco-Bozdemir Joint Venture, LLC File: B-421742; B-421742.2, B-421742.3; B-421742.4; B-421742.5; B-421742.6 Date: September 19, 2023 Lisa A. Markman, Esq., and Douglas L. Patin, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for the protesters. Nick R. Hoogstraten, Esq., and Marcos R. Gonzalez, Esq., Peckar & Abramson, PC, for Sicra Ile de France, the intervenor. Kathleen D. Martin, Esq., Department of State, for the agency. Emily R. O’Hara, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protesters’ challenge to the agency’s review of awardee’s responsibility is dismissed where the protesters do not provide sufficient information to meet GAO’s threshold for reviewing an agency’s affirmative responsibility determination. 2. Protesters’ challenges to the agency’s evaluation of awardee’s proposal are denied where the record demonstrates the agency’s evaluation was reasonable, consistent with the terms of the solicitation, and where the protester cannot demonstrate competitive prejudice. 3. Protesters’ challenges to the agency’s evaluations of the protesters’ proposals are denied where the record demonstrates the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. 4. Protesters’ challenges to the best-value tradeoff decision are denied where the underlying evaluation of proposals was reasonable, and where the agency qualitatively compared proposal attributes in performing the tradeoff analysis. DECISION Desbuild Incorporated, of Hyattsville, Maryland, and Framaco-Bozdemir Joint Venture, LLC (FBJV), of Rye Brook, New York, protest the award of a contract to Sicra Ile de France (Sicra), of Ile-De-France, France, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 19AQMM21R0001, issued by the Department of State (DOS), for the construction of a new residential facility in Paris, France. The protesters claim that the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s proposal and the source selection decision were unreasonable. The protesters also challenge various aspects of the evaluations of their own proposals. We deny the protests. BACKGROUND The solicitation, issued on March 1, 2021, by DOS’s Bureau of Overseas Building Operations (OBO), sought a contractor to perform the construction of a new residential facility for marine security guards at the U.S. Embassy in Paris, France. Desbuild Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1. Among other things, the RFP required the design and construction of a consulate, on-site storage/shops/motorpool, compound access control buildings, residence building, and a vehicle parking garage. Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, RFP at 116; AR, Tab 9, Source Selection Decision (SSD) at 1.[1] The agency anticipated the award of a fixed-price contract, with a 28-month performance period.[2] RFP at 15, 127. Award was to be made on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering price and the following non-price factors: construction and commissioning (C&C) experience (factor 1); constructor past performance (factor 2); contractor capability, scope comprehension and risk management (factor 3); management (factor 4), and schedule (factor 5). Id. at 131-133. Additionally, the agency would evaluate, on a pass/fail basis, the following factors: safety (factor 6); TCN [third country nationals] recruitment plan (factor 7); housing plan (factor 8); and small business subcontracting plan (factor 9). Id. at 133. Non‑price factors were listed in order of descending importance. Id. at 132. When combined, non-price factors were significantly more important than price. Id. The agency received three final proposal revisions from Sicra, Desbuild, and FBJV on March 24, 2023. AR, Tab 7, CO Award Recommendation at 9.