Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Silver Bow Constr. v. State, Department of Administration, Division of General Services

Supreme Court of Alaska

July 25, 2014

SILVER BOW CONSTRUCTION, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF ALASKA, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, DIVISION OF GENERAL SERVICES, Appellee

Appeal from the Superior Court of the State of Alaska, First Judicial District, Juneau, Louis J. Menendez, Judge. Superior Court No. 1JU-11-01010 CI.

Jack B. McGee, Law Office of Jack B. McGee, Juneau, for Appellant.

Jessica M. Alloway, Assistant Attorney General, Anchorage, and Michael C. Geraghty, Attorney General, Juneau, for Appellee.

Before: Fabe, Chief Justice, Winfree, Stowers, Maassen, and Bolger, Justices.

OPINION

Page 923

BOLGER, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

The Department of Administration, Division of General Services (Division) accepted a 15-page response to a request for proposals for renovations to the Governor's House. The request stated that responses should not exceed 10 pages. Silver Bow Construction, a competing bidder, argues that this variance from the request obligated the Division to reject the 15-page response. Because the Division reasonably concluded that this variance did not give the 15-page response any substantial advantage, we affirm the superior court's decision to uphold the Division's decision to accept this response.

II. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

In November 2010 the Division issued a request for proposals to perform exterior renovations to the Governor's House in Juneau. The request imposed specific submission requirements and guidelines. Paragraph 8 of the request included the instructions relevant to this appeal, and required the companies to

[a]ttach criteria Responses (EXCEPT PRICE PROPOSAL) to the Contractor's Technical Proposal (Section 00313). The maximum number of attached pages (each printed side equals one page) for criteria Responses shall not exceed: 10 pages.[1]

Paragraph 8 warned that " Criteria Responses which exceed the maximum page limit or otherwise do not meet requirements stated herein, may result in disqualification."

Four companies submitted proposals: Alaska Commercial Contractors, Inc., Silver Bow Construction Co., North Pacific Erectors, and JKM General Contractors LLC. Alaska Commercial submitted a 15-page proposal, JKM submitted an 11-page proposal, Silver Bow submitted a 10-page proposal, and North Pacific submitted a 7-page proposal.

The procurement officer for the Division accepted and reviewed all four proposals. The procurement officer concluded that Alaska Commercial's proposal did not contain more substance than the others, that it was not in the State's best interest to " needlessly reduce competition" by disqualifying acceptable proposals " strictly on form," and that all four proposals had technical deficiencies. When the Division subsequently performed a word count, it found ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.