Link: GAO Opinion
Agency: Department of the Air Force
Disposition: Protest denied.
Keywords: Price Calculation Error
General Counsel P.C. Highlight: An offeror has the responsibility to submit a well-written proposal, with adequately detailed information which clearly demonstrates compliance with the solicitation requirements and allows a meaningful review by the procuring agency. The offeror must affirmatively demonstrate the merits of its proposal, and risks the rejection of its proposal if it fails to do so.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
The Department of the Air Force issued a request for proposals (RFP) for the repair and replacement of roofs at the United States Air Force Academy. The RFP was set aside for eligible section 8(a) firms, provided for the award of a fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) contract for a base and four option years. Offerors were informed that award would be made to a technically acceptable offeror on the basis of a past performance-price tradeoff. The RFP stated that the agency did not intend to conduct discussions or provide offerors with an opportunity for proposal revisions.
JBlanco Enterprises, Inc. (JBlanco) submitted a proposal that was found technically unacceptable since its required technical volume did not demonstrate compliance with the specification’s instructions for preparation of the demonstration project. Specifically, the RFP instructions required the offeror to apply a multiplier at one point in the price calculations, JBlanco applied the multiplier at a different point in the price calculation. JBlanco argues that its noncompliance was only a minor error that the firm should have been permitted to clarify.
GAO states that an offeror has the responsibility to submit a well-written proposal, with adequately detailed information which clearly demonstrates compliance with the solicitation requirements and allows a meaningful review by the procuring agency. The offeror must affirmatively demonstrate the merits of its proposal, and risks the rejection of its proposal if it fails to do so. JBlanco did not submit a technical proposal that clearly demonstrated its ability to satisfactorily calculate prices as instructed. GAO does not agree that the failure to demonstrate its capability to properly prepare task order proposals could be waived as a minor error or corrected through clarifications. The error implicates JBlanco’s ability to properly prepare its task order proposals and GAO finds no basis to question the reasonableness of the agency’s determination. The protest is denied.