BNUMBER:  B-275891
DATE:  March 12, 1997
TITLE:  Trident Maintenance Inc.

**********************************************************************

Matter of:Trident Maintenance Inc.

File:     B-275891

Date:March 12, 1997

Rudolph G. Vegliante, for the protester.
Sharon J. Chen, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency.
Guy R. Pietrovito, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.

DIGEST

In a sealed bid procurement for janitorial and related services for a 
federal building, the contracting agency improperly calculated the 
protester's and awardee's bid prices for estimated quantities of 
services where the agency treated the firms' prices per 1,000 square 
feet for certain contract line items as prices per square foot, which 
had the result of substantially inflating and skewing the firms' total 
bid prices.

DECISION

Trident Maintenance Inc. protests the award of a contract to Alaska 
Lee's Inc. under invitation for bids (IFB) No. GS-05P-96-GAC-0274, 
issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) for janitorial and 
related services at the Charles A. Halleck Federal Building in 
Lafayette, Indiana.  Trident contends that under a proper bid price 
calculation its bid is lower priced than Alaska Lee's.

We sustain the protest.

The IFB provided for the award of a contract for janitorial and 
related services for a base and 4 option years.  Building information 
was provided that informed bidders of, among other things, the 
building's gross area (51,681 square feet (SF)), occupiable area 
(24,324 SF), bare office flooring (2,258 SF), and carpeted office area 
(11,679 SF).  The solicitation's schedule of supplies or services and 
prices requested that bidders provide their price per month for the 
base and option years to perform the "basic services" and to also 
provide their prices for various quantities (per 1,000 SF) for some 
services, and per job, per blind, and per hour for other services) of 
specified "other contract services."  Bidders were informed by section 
M that the agency would use the following formula to evaluate bid 
prices:[1]

Basic Services:

Monthly price  X  12                      $                       

"(Note:  The square footages are divided by l000.  That result will be 
multiplied by an estimate of the number of times the service might be 
used.  The same will hold true for Blind and Window Washing.)"

Other Contract Services:

Floor Maintenance Services (Office)
  Stripping & Refinishing:        /1000 SF  X  2,258 SF            $          
  Stripping & Sealing:        /1000 SF  X  2,258 SF            $          
  Carpet Cleaning:          /1000 SF  X 11,679 SF            $          

Floor Maintenance Services (Corridors)
  Stripping & Refinishing:        /1000 SF  X  5,327 SF            $          
  Stripping & Sealing:        /1000 SF  X  5,327 SF            $          
  Carpet Cleaning:          /1000 SF  X     83  SF            $          

Scrub and rinse loading docks, platforms, trash rooms, garage ramps, 
and driveways:              /1000 SF  X    630 SF            $          

High Cleaning:              /1000 SF  X       0 SF            $          

Wash Blinds:                /Blind  X  253 Blinds             $          

Window Washing:             /Job  X  1 Job                      $          

Snow Removal:               /Hour  X  0 Hours                 $          

GSA received six bids by the bid opening date.  Trident's and Alaska 
Lee's provided the following bid prices:[2]

                                   Trident        Alaska Lee's
Basic Services:  
  Total Price (base and option years):    $186,431   $179,400

Other Contract Services:
  (base and option years)

Floor Maintenance Services (Offices)
  Stripping & Refinishing             $70             .06 SF
  Stripping & Sealing                 $70             .06 SF
  Carpet Cleaning                     $55             .06 SF

Floor Maintenance Services (Corridors)                  
  Stripping & Refinishing             $70             .06 SF
  Stripping & Sealing                 $70             .05 SF
  Carpet Cleaning                     $55             .06 SF       

Scrub and rinse loading docks, etc.        $50        .04 F

High Cleaning                         $60             .02 SF

Wash Blinds                             $3             $19

Window Washing                       $225             $650

Snow Removal                          $40              $70

In evaluating bid prices, GSA converted Alaska Lee's price per SF to a 
price per 1,000 SF; for example, Alaska's Lee's bid price of .06 per 
SF for stripping and refinishing office floors was converted to $60 
per 1,000 SF.  GSA then multiplied Trident's and Alaska Lee's bid 
prices per 1,000 SF for the various floor maintenance services, 
scrubbing and rinsing of loading docks, and high clearing line items 
against the solicitation's stated estimated quantities.  Using this 
calculation, GSA determined that Alaska Lee's had submitted the lowest 
total bid price of $8,145,935 and that Trident had submitted the 
second lowest total bid price of $8,892,890.  Award was made to Alaska 
Lee's, and this protest followed.  Performance has been stayed pending 
our decision in this matter.

Trident contends that GSA misapplied the IFB evaluation formula in 
calculating the bidders' total bid prices.  Specifically, Trident 
complains that GSA treated Trident's and Alaska Lee's prices per 1,000 
SF for the floor maintenance services, scrubbing and rinsing of 
loading docks, and high clearing line items as prices per SF, which 
skewed the calculation of the total bid prices.  Trident asserts that 
under a proper bid price evaluation, its bid price is lower than 
Alaska Lee's.  We agree.

GSA replies that the IFB requested bid prices per 1,000 SF for the 
floor maintenance services, scrubbing and rinsing of loading docks, 
and high clearing line items, and that inclusion of the symbol "/" in 
the formula meant "per."  However, GSA does not explain why this 
required the agency to treat bidders' prices per 1,000 SF as prices 
per SF in performing the calculation.  This resulted in a substantial 
(1,000 fold) increase in the government's stated estimated quantities 
for these line items and in a vastly inflated and skewed total bid 
price.

The IFB did not provide for such a calculation, as the agency 
suggests; nor would such a calculation be reasonable.[3]  The only 
reasonable reading of the solicitation is that in determining the bid 
prices, bid prices per 1,000 SF for the floor maintenance services, 
scrubbing and rinsing of loading docks, and high clearing line items 
would be applied against the appropriate estimated quantities for 
those services.[4]  In this regard, IFBs whose evaluation schemes do 
not evaluate bids against the total or actual work to be performed, or 
a reasonable estimate of the work to be performed, fail to ensure the 
selection of the lowest cost bidder and are defective.  See 
Southeastern Servs., Inc. and Worldwide Servs., Inc., 56 Comp. Gen. 
668 (1977), 77-1 CPD  para.  390; Chemical Technology, Inc., B-187940, Feb. 
22, 1977, 77-1 CPD  para.  126.  

We recalculated Trident's and Alaska Lee's total bid prices by 
determining a price per SF for the floor maintenance services, 
scrubbing and rinsing of loading docks, and high clearing line items 
and multiplying that price per SF against the stated estimated 
quantities.  Based upon our calculation of the firms' bid prices, we 
find that Trident submitted the lowest total bid price of $200,053 for 
the base and 4 option years and Alaska Lee's submitted the second low 
bid price of $214,624.25.[5]   Based upon this calculation, Trident 
appears to be entitled to award as bidder submitting the lowest total 
bid price.

We recommend that the contract awarded to Alaska Lee's be terminated 
for the convenience of the government and award made to Trident, if 
that firm is otherwise found eligible for award.  We also recommend 
that Trident be reimbursed its reasonable costs of filing and pursuing 
the protest.  Bid Protest Regulations, section 21.8(d)(1), 61 Fed. 
Reg. 39039, 39046 (1996) (to be codified at 4 C.F.R.  sec.  21.8(d)(1)).  
The protester should submit its certified claim for protest costs to 
GSA within 60 days of receiving this decision.  Section 21.8(f)(1), 
supra.

This protest is sustained.

Comptroller General
of the United States

1. This same formula was repeated for the 4 option years.  The total 
evaluated bid price was the sum of the base year and option year 
prices.

2. We calculate that none of the other bids could be considered low.

3. As quoted above, there was a note in the formula stating that 
"square footages are divided by 1000" and "that result will be 
multiplied by an estimate."  This indecipherable note, which the 
agency has not sought to explain, provides no support for GSA's 
calculations. 

4. While the IFB did not specifically identify the mathematical 
calculation that would be performed  to determine what a bidder's 
price to perform the service would be, a number of different 
calculations could be performed to properly determine the bidder's 
total evaluated bid price.  For example, bidders' prices per SF could 
be determined by dividing the bidders' prices per 1,000 SF by 1,000, 
as the protester suggests, or a bidder's price per 1,000 SF could be 
multiplied against the product of the stated estimated quantity 
divided by 1,000. 

5. This price calculation results in a total, 5-year contract price 
that is consistent with the total price paid under the incumbent 
contract for basically the same services.  Specifically, the IFB 
stated that the incumbent contractor was being paid $3,715.40 per 
month, which would result in a total contract price of $222,924 for 5 
years.