Quality Technology, Inc., B-292883.2, January 21, 2004

B-292883.2 Jan 21, 2004 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Cancellation of request for quotations was reasonable where quotations received were substantially higher than agency's available funding for requirement. Contends that the cancellation lacks a reasonable basis and is only a pretext by the agency to avoid our Office's review of an earlier protest Quality filed challenging the agency's failure to solicit its quotation under the RFQ. Quality filed a protest with our Office contending that the agency's failure to solicit its quotation was a de facto debarment of the firm. /1/ The protester alleged that agency personnel told Quality that it was not solicited because the agency decided "to move in a different direction. The record shows that shortly after the RFQ was issued. View Decision Quality Technology, Inc., B-292883.2, January 21, 2004 * REDACTED DECISION DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Quality Technology, Inc. protests the cancellation of request for quotations (RFQ) No. 030110, issued by the Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), for Enterprise Architecture Document (EAD) support services. The EAD defines the enterprise architecture required to ensure efficient use of information technology resources to meet the agency's mission and goals; the RFQ provides for the upgrade and update of the EAD. Quality, the incumbent contractor, contends that the cancellation lacks a reasonable basis and is only a pretext by the agency to avoid our Office's review of an earlier protest Quality filed challenging the agency's failure to solicit its quotation under the RFQ. We deny the protest. The agency issued the RFQ on September 3, 2003, to four Federal Supply Schedule vendors, but not to Quality. Although Quality obtained a copy of the solicitation from another vendor, it did not submit a quotation. On September 22, Quality filed a protest with our Office contending that the agency's failure to solicit its quotation was a de facto debarment of the firm. /1/ The protester alleged that agency personnel told Quality that it was not solicited because the agency decided "to move in a different direction," which Quality considered to be a de facto debarment of the firm. Protest at 3. The record shows that shortly after the RFQ was issued, and prior to the filing of Quality's initial protest, the contracting officer's technical representative (COTR) (by e-mail communication of September 9) raised concerns to other contracting personnel about the adequacy of available funding for the work required under the RFQ. Specifically, she recognized that funding for the RFQ's services was available in the amount of $[deleted]; these funds were for [deleted] support personnel at a total of [deleted] labor hours. /2/ The RFQ, on the other hand, required five support personnel at a total of 8,820 labor hours. The three quotations received ranged from $[deleted] to $[deleted]. Finding that some RFQ requirements may be duplicative, and that efficiency and economy would be better achieved by ordering some of the work under other agency contracts for particular types of work, the agency determined that cancellation was warranted. The effective date of the cancellation (September 24) was 2 days after Quality had filed its earlier protest of the agency's failure to request a quotation from Quality. A contracting agency need only establish a reasonable basis to support a decision to cancel an RFQ. DataTrak Consulting, Inc., B-292502 et al., Sept. 26, 2003, 2003 CPD Para. 169 at 5; Surgi-Textile, B-289370, Feb. 7, 2002, 2002 CPD Para. 38 at 2. It is well established that lack of funding for a procurement provides a reasonable basis for cancellation, James M. Carroll--Recon., B-221502.3, Mar. 24, 1986, 86-1 CPD Para. 290 at 3; cancellation is also warranted where a solicitation fails to reflect an agency's actual requirements and reassessment of agency needs results in an agency no longer having a requirement included in that solicitation. See USA Elecs., B-283269.2, Oct. 5, 1999, 99-2 CPD Para. 67 at 3. So long as there is a reasonable basis for doing so, an agency may cancel a solicitation no matter when the information precipitating the cancellation first arises, even if it is not until quotations have been submitted and evaluated. Id. Our review of the record here provides no basis for us to question the reasonableness of the agency's cancellation of the RFQ. ATF has adequately demonstrated that the cancellation reasonably resulted from funding limitations and a subsequently discovered overstatement of its actual needs. The protester contends that a lack of documentation in the record supports its belief that the agency fabricated its basis for cancellation in order to avoid review of Quality's initial protest of alleged de facto debarment.