B-297392, Language Services Associates, Inc., January 17, 2006

B-297392 Jan 17, 2006 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Language Services Associates, Inc. (LSA) protests the issuance of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) to Bowne Global Solutions II, Inc. (BGS) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. HSSCCG-05-Q-0014, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, for interpreter services for the agency's asylum program. LSA challenges the agency's decision to issue a BPA to BGS, a vendor submitting a lower priced quotation. We deny the protest. View Decision B-297392, Language Services Associates, Inc., January 17, 2006 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: Language Services Associates, Inc. File: B-297392 Date: January 17, 2006 Robert G. Fryling, Esq., and Brian S. Gocial, Esq., Blank Rome LLP, for the protester. G. Lindsay Simmons, Esq., J. Eric Whytsell, Esq., and April Min, Esq., Jackson Kelly PLLC, for Bowne Global Solutions II, Inc., an intervenor. Kevin M. Walker, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, for the agency. Linda S. Lebowitz, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest is denied where the agency reasonably evaluated the selected vendor's quotation in accordance with the terms of the solicitation; to the extent that there were any flaws in the agency's conduct of the procurement, the protester failed to show that it was competitively prejudiced. DECISION Language Services Associates, Inc. (LSA) protests the issuance of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) to Bowne Global Solutions II, Inc. (BGS) under request for quotations (RFQ) No. HSSCCG-05-Q-0014, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, for interpreter services for the agency's asylum program. LSA challenges the agency's decision to issue a BPA to BGS, a vendor submitting a lower priced quotation. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFQ, issued on July 12, 2005, contemplated the issuance of a BPA on a fixed'price basis for a period of 5 years to the –best-value— vendor which held a General Services Administration Federal Supply Schedule contract for interpretation services under Group 738 II, Special Item Number 382-2. As relevant here, the RFQ stated that the agency would require interpreters to provide telephonic monitoring or direct interpretation in the language of the asylum seeker being interviewed and that there could be some cases in which in-person interpreter services would be needed, requiring the interpreter's physical presence at the interview site. The RFQ listed the 10 most commonly requested languages and included a list of other required languages. In determining the –best-value— vendor, the RFQ stated that the BPA would be issued to the responsible vendor whose quotation, conforming to the RFQ, resulted in the most advantageous integration of technical evaluation factors (management approach, performance approach, and past performance) and price. The RFQ stated that the technical evaluation factors, when combined, would be considered significantly more important than price. The RFQ explained that the agency was more concerned with obtaining superior technical performance rather than the lowest overall price. However, the RFQ also explained that the agency would not issue a BPA at a significantly higher overall price to achieve only a slightly superior technical performance. Finally, the RFQ stated that the agency intended to issue the BPA without conducting discussions, except for communications conducted for the purpose of clarification. As a result, the RFQ advised a vendor to submit its quotation on the most favorable terms. On August 3, the agency issued amendment No. 2 to the RFQ. In this amendment, the agency provided answers to 38 questions posed by vendors. One of these questions requested a percentage breakdown of the required services. The agency responded that while it had not calculated exact percentages of the work done to date, it estimated that over 90 percent of the work has involved telephonic (as opposed to on-site) interpretation services. The agency explained that it did not anticipate a significant change with respect to using on-site interpreters and that the estimates provided were based on historical percentages and were provided for pricing purposes only. The agency advised that any variation from these percentages during the performance of the BPA requirements would –not be [a] basis for an equitable adjustment.— RFQ amend. 2, Question and Answer No. 6. In addition, one question asked if vendors should provide prices on a per-hour basis or on a per'minute basis.