Snell Enterprises, Inc.

Snell Enterprises, Inc. TITLE: Snell Enterprises, Inc. BNUMBER: B-290113; B-290113.2 DATE: June 10, 2002 ********************************************************************** Snell Enterprises, Inc., B-290113; B-290113.2, June 10, 2002 DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Snell Enterprises, Inc. File: B-290113; B-290113.2 Date: June 10, 2002 Kevin P. Mullen, Esq., and Maureen A. Kersey, Esq., Piper Rudnick, for the protester. Devon E. Hewitt, Esq., and Daniel S. Herzfeld, Esq., Shaw Pittman, for Impact Innovations Group, Inc., an intervenor. Mary E. Clarke, Esq., and Thomas Tinti, Esq., Department of Defense, for the agency. John L. Formica, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest alleging that a firm should be excluded from competition under a solicitation for information technology services because it assisted in the preparation of the solicitation is denied, where the allegation is based on inference and suspicion rather than substantial facts or hard evidence, and the agency unequivocally and credibly asserts that the firm did not assist in the preparation of the solicitation. 2. Protest that a firm should be excluded from competition under a solicitation for information technology services because the firm, through its performance of a delivery order for the agency, was given access to information that the protester now claims as proprietary, is denied, where the information was furnished voluntarily and without restrictions on its use. 3. With regard to a solicitation that consolidates services previously performed by two contractors under separate delivery orders into one contract, protest by one of the contractors that the other contractor (a competitor) gained an unfair competitive advantage by obtaining from the agency the names and home telephone numbers of the contractor's employees is denied where the contractor's competitor was already familiar with the contractor's employees and there is thus no indication that the agency's actions resulted in any unfair competitive advantage. 4. Prior performance of similar requirements by a firm does not give rise to a prohibited conflict of interest or provide an unfair competitive advantage where any advantage the firm may have is merely that of an incumbent contractor. DECISION Snell Enterprises, Inc. protests a procurement under request for proposals (RFP) No. MDA112-02-R-0009, issued by the Television-Audio Support Activity (T?ASA), American Forces Information Service (AFIS), Department of Defense (DOD), for on-site information systems administration and engineering support for the AFIS-Headquarters (AFIS-HQ), the Defense Information School (DINFOS), and other AFIS locations. Snell contends that Impact Innovations Group, Inc., which has also submitted a proposal in response to the solicitation, has an impermissible conflict of interest. We deny the protest. The AFIS provides, among other things, advice and assistance to the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense regarding the management and operation of certain DOD internal information programs, public affairs programs, and audiovisual training and education. The information and technology engineering services in support of AFIS have been performed since 1997 by Snell and Impact under their respective General Services Admininstration Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contracts. Snell has been providing on-site technical support to DINFOS, including the integration, installation, operation and maintenance of approximately 1,400 computer systems, at an annual cost to the government of $1.85 million.