B-297210; B-297210.2; B-297210.3, WorldWide Language Resources, Inc., November 28, 2005

B-297210; B-297210.2; B-297210.3, WorldWide Language Resources, Inc., November 28, 2005 TITLE: B-297210; B-297210.2; B-297210.3, WorldWide Language Resources, Inc., November 28, 2005 BNUMBER: B-297210; B-297210.2; B-297210.3 DATE: November 28, 2005 *************************************************************************************** B-297210; B-297210.2; B-297210.3, WorldWide Language Resources, Inc., November 28, 2005 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: WorldWide Language Resources, Inc. File: B-297210; B-297210.2; B-297210.3 Date: November 28, 2005 Richard D. Lieberman, Esq., Warren S. Feldman, Esq., and Nicole S. Allen, Esq., McCarthy, Sweeney & Harkaway, PC, for the protester. Alison L. Doyle, Esq, McKenna Long & Aldridge, LLP, for SOS International, Ltd., an intervenor. Clarence D. Long, III, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Sharon L. Larkin, Esq., and James A. Spangenberg, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging award for linguistics support services is denied, where agency reasonably concluded that protester's quotation was technically unacceptable since the protester's linguists did not meet the requirements of the solicitation. DECISION WorldWide Language Resources, Inc. (WWLR) protests the award of a delivery order to SOS International, Inc. under request for quotations (RFQ) No. FA4416-05-Q-0900 issued by the Department of the Air Force for linguistics support services. We deny the protest. The RFQ sought 22 linguists to provide 24-hour, 7-day per week coverage in support of the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI), which is responsible for providing special investigative and counter-intelligence support services to the United States Air Force. The primary function of the linguists was to furnish language, dialect, and interpretation services for AFOSI throughout Central and Southwest Asia in furtherance of the global war on terrorism. Of the 22 linguists required, 2 were to possess "top secret" security clearances (either final or interim clearances) and 20 were to have "secret" security clearances (which had to be "verifiable [and] final"). RFQ, Performance Work Statement (PWS), sections 1.0-1.1.1, 1.2.5.1.2; amend. 1, Q&A 22 and 39. The RFQ also stated that "[o]n a case-by-case, limited basis, interim secret clearances may be accepted by the [contracting officer's representative]." RFQ, PWS, sect. 1.2.5.1.2. Linguists were also required to possess a minimum of 2 years translation experience and "demonstrate the ability to write, understand, listen, read, speak and electronically translate in clear and concise grammar and pronunciation from the required target language as well as back into English." Id., sect. 1.2.5.2. The RFQ was issued to 14 vendors holding General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contracts. The solicitation provided for award of a fixed-price delivery order for a 6-month base period with a 6-month option. Award was to be made on a "best value" basis, considering price, technical acceptability, and past performance. Technical acceptability was to be determined on a pass/fail basis, considering resumes (which were to be evaluated against standards stated in the PWS, including security clearances) and test scores (which were to "achieve a minimum of 95% accuracy rate"). The RFQ provided that technically acceptable quotations "shall be treated equally except for their prices and performance records" and that past performance was "significantly more important than cost or price considerations." RFQ at 13-14. WWLR and SOS were among five vendors that responded to the RFQ. WWLR's quotation (at a price of $5,752,580) included linguists that were providing AFOSI mission support under another contract. The agency determined that WWLR's quotation was technically unacceptable because [redacted] of the 20 identified linguists did not possess the requisite final secret clearances (although these linguists possessed interim secret clearances). In addition, the evaluators noted that some of the linguists did not have the required experience and/or their test scores were too low.[1] Agency Report (AR), Tab 7, Memorandum for Record and Individual Technical Evaluation Sheets (WWLR). SOS's quotation and that of another vendor were found to be technically acceptable as those firms identified linguists with the requisite clearances, experience, and test scores.