Matter of: Service Company of Louis Rogers, Inc. File: B-248995.2 Date: November 16, 1992

Matter of: Service Company of Louis Rogers, Inc. File: B-248995.2 Date: November 16, 1992

PROCUREMENT Competitive Negotiation Offers Evaluation errors Evaluation criteria Application In a procurement for ship repairs where solicitation required the successful offeror to provide pier space during a specified 35-day period, agency's determination that protester's contingent proposal of pier space was unacceptable was consistent with the stated evaluation criteria.

Attorneys

DECISION Service Company of Louis Rogers, Inc. (SCLR) protests the Department of the Navy's elimination of its proposal from the competitive range under request for proposals (RFP) No. N62381-92-R-0208. SCLR maintains that the Navy found SCLR's proposal technically unacceptable on the basis of unstated evaluation criteria.

We deny the protest.

The RFP, issued on February 11, 1992, called for the performance of various repairs to a Navy ship, the USNS VEGA, to be performed during a 35 -day period of availability. The RFP established various evaluation factors, including "manpower requirements," "facilities," "subcontractor participation," and "experience and past performance," and stated that award would be made on the basis of the low priced, technically acceptable proposal, and provided that to be technically acceptable a proposal must be evaluated as acceptable under each evaluation factor.

On or before the March 24, 1992, closing date, the agency received 11 proposals, including one from SCLR. SCLR's proposal stated that it intended to lease pier space for contract performance from the Canaveral Port Authority but failed to indicate that it had a firm commitment for the proposed space. The agency performed an initial review and evaluation of the proposals. By memorandum dated April 16, the chairman of the source selection evaluation board (SSEB) advised the source selection authority (SSA) that SCLR's proposal was deficient in the following areas: "manpower requirements"; "facilities"; and "subcontractor participation." With regard to SCLR's proposed facilities, the Navy was concerned by SCLR's failure to show a firm commitment of pier space during the specified period of availability. By letter dated May 5, the Navy conducted written discussions with SCLR. Among other things, the agency asked SCLR to submit "confirmation of pier lease." In responding to this request, SCLR stated:

"As a point of clarification, SCLR, Inc. and the Canaveral Port Authority have negotiated pier arrangements for the USNS VEGA availability. It is a written policy of the Canaveral Port Authority not to long term reserve piers for ships other than those in the Cruise industry. SCLR has pier space available for the full term of the USNS VEGA availability based on pier schedules projections. Upon contract award SCLR and Canaveral Port Authority will contractually commit pier space." (Emphasis added.)

Upon reviewing SCLR's revised proposal, the agency concluded that it was technically unacceptable. By memorandum dated May 15, the SSEB chairman advised the SSA that SCLR's proposal had been evaluated as technically unacceptable in the areas of "manpower tractor participation"; and "experience and past performance." Based on this evaluation, SCLR's proposal was eliminated from the competitive range.

On May 22, the contracting officer orally advised SCLR that its proposal had been eliminated from the competitive range. Among other things, the contracting officer noted that the contingent availability of SCLR's proposed facility was unacceptable. Based on this conversation, SCLR filed an agency-level protest. After the agency denied SCLR's agency-level protest, SCLR protested to our Office.

SCLR's protest focuses on the agency's evaluation of its proposed facility. SCLR asserts that the agency improperly found its proposed facility unacceptable in that the solicitation did not expressly state that offerors must guarantee pier availability and, therefore, the agency applied evaluation criteria other than those established by the solicitation.

In evaluating proposals, agencies may apply only those factors specified in the solicitation. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sec. 15.608(a). In reviewing protests against allegedly improper evaluations, our Office will examine the record to determine whether the agency's evaluation was reasonable and in accordance with the stated evaluation criteria. Abt Assocs., Inc., B-237060.2, Feb. 26, 1990, 90-1 CPD Para. 223. Here, we find that the evaluation of SCLR's proposal was reasonable and consistent with the stated criteria.

The RFP specifically stated "contractor must provide facilities, drydock, [and] berthing"; provided that the proposed facility must be available between June 22 and July 27, 1992; and expressly advised offerors that proposals would be evaluated on the basis of the facilities proposed. Despite the RFP requirement that the repair work be performed during a fixed, limited time period, SCLR offered no specific assurance that it would be able to provide pier space during that period. Rather, in response to the agency's request for confirmation that a berth would be available, SCLR replied that the entity from which it planned to obtain space gave preference to cruise ships and indicated that a pier would be available for the Navy ship only if that space was not needed for requirements of the solicitation, we believe the Navy's determination that SCLR's proposal was unacceptable due to the contingent availability of its proposed pier was consistent with the stated RFP evaluation factors. The protest is denied.