Airport project appeal denied

Subscribe Now Choose a package that suits your preferences.
Start Free Account Get access to 7 premium stories every month for FREE!
Already a Subscriber? Current print subscriber? Activate your complimentary Digital account.

KAILUA-KONA — The bid protest stalling a key part of the modernization of the Kona International Airport was denied in a decision issued Friday.

KAILUA-KONA — The bid protest stalling a key part of the modernization of the Kona International Airport was denied in a decision issued Friday.

Nan Inc. won the state Department of Transportation contract to build a number of structures, including the new screening building, screening area, restroom buildings and bag drop areas. It is also in charge of demolishing the Onizuka Space Center building and doing work on the ramps, among other tasks.

Hensel Phelps Construction Co. filed a bid protest June 16.

The dispute arose as a result of incorrect information on the state Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs website that listed Big Island Air Conditioning Inc.’s license was forfeited due to lack of insurance. This was incorrect as the company had insurance coverage the entire time. BIAC was a listed subcontractor for the companies.

But Hensel Phelps Construction Co. chose another subcontractor as a result of the incorrect information, which resulted in a “bid price (that) would have been at least $3 million less than that submitted by (Nan, Inc.),” according to the complaint.

Nan Inc. was the lowest bidder at $69,014,200. Hensel Phelps was the next at $69,406,000. The difference comes to slightly more than a half a percent.

But the dispute was dismissed in part because BIAC’s bid was not expensive enough, as the the subcontractor listed a bid to Nan Inc., for $1,575,000. State law requires that a bid protest cover items that cover at least 10 percent of the cost of the project, or $6.9 million.

However, Hensel Phelps argued that Nan Inc.’s bid was innately flawed, which should mandate a complete review.

The hearing officer did not agree and kept the bid with Nan Inc.