Link: GAO Decision
Protestor: William J. Brant, Jr. & Associates
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Disposition: Protest Denied.
Protest challenging an agency’s technical evaluation of protester’s proposal is denied where the record shows that the agency’s evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation.
General Counsel PC Highlight:
William J. Brant, Jr. & Associates (Brant) protested the award to US Federal Properties Co. (USFP) of a contract for construction and lease of an outpatient clinic in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Award would be made on a best value basis, considering price and the following technical evaluation factors: technical quality, evidence of capability to perform prior to award, and operations and maintenance plan. Although Brant offered the lowest-price proposal, it received the lowest technical score among the competitive range offerors.
The GAO found that the agency’s evaluation of Brant’s technical proposal was reasonable. It pointed out that Brant did not include an explanation in its revised proposal as to the impact of removing certain columns; Brant had argued that the agency should have known based on earlier submissions that the columns were not structural. The agency had also reasonably determined that Brant’s proposal demonstrated little relevant past performance for the firm. The GAO also found that Brant had not shown that the agency’s concern as to whether Brant’s maintenance superintendent would be onsite full-time was unreasonable.
Offerors bear the burden of submitting adequately written proposals that comply in all respects with the terms of the solicitation. When given the opportunity to submit revised proposals, offerors must ensure that the revised proposal stands alone. The agency has no obligation to seek out information missing from the second submission which may have been included in the first proposal.