B-299904.2, Zolon Tech, Inc., September 18, 2007

B-299904.2 Sep 18, 2007 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Zolon Tech, Inc. protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) with Vistronix, Inc. under request for quotations (RFQ) No. AG-3144-S-07-0012, issued by the Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), for information systems development, support, and maintenance services. Zolon challenges the technical and price evaluations and the risk determination. We deny the protest. View Decision B-299904.2, Zolon Tech, Inc., September 18, 2007 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: Zolon Tech, Inc. File: B-299904.2 Date: September 18, 2007 J. Patrick McMahon, Esq., and William T. Welch, Esq., Barton, Baker, McMahon & Tolle, LLP, for the protester. John E. Jensen, Esq., Daniel S. Herzfeld, Esq., and Kelly E. Buroker, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, for Vistronix, Inc., an intervenor. Heather M. Self, Esq., Department of Agriculture, for the agency. Paul E. Jordan, Esq., and John M. Melody, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Agency reasonably assessed weaknesses in evaluation of protester's experience as to core technology, where firm intended to rely on experienced consultant instead of contractor personnel, and as to management system, where firm's initial quotation did not address the system and oral presentation/revised quotation included only limited reference to it. 2. Price evaluation that determined protester's prices to be unrealistic was unobjectionable where based on both firm's low revised draft task order price, as compared to government estimate, and sample of firm's loaded labor rates, which were significantly lower than those of incumbent contractors. 3. Agency determination that small business's unrealistically low price represented high risk, and decision to make award to vendor with technically superior, higher-priced quotation were part of a comparative best value evaluation, not a responsibility determination requiring referral to the Small Business Administration. DECISION Zolon Tech, Inc. protests the establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) with Vistronix, Inc. under request for quotations (RFQ) No. AG-3144-S-07-0012, issued by the Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), for information systems development, support, and maintenance services. Zolon challenges the technical and price evaluations and the risk determination. We deny the protest. The RFQ contemplated the establishment, on a –best value— basis, of a single BPA against the successful vendor's Federal Supply Schedule contract for a base year, with 4 option years. Work under the BPA was to be accomplished on the basis of task orders for technology, operations, and management support services, primarily in the areas of software and database analysis, design, development, integration, deployment, support, and maintenance at NRCS in Fort Collins, Colorado, and other locations across the country. Quotations were to be evaluated under five factors--technical approach, past performance, socioeconomic business status, socioeconomic business status of the overall contractor team arrangement (if proposed), and price. Under the technical approach factor, quotations were to be evaluated on the vendor's BPA master management plan, draft task order management and quality control plans, transition plan, and technical experience, including key personnel. Past performance was to be evaluated on the basis of how well vendors had performed work the same as or similar to that described in the statement of work. Price was to be evaluated for completeness, realism, and reasonableness based on each vendor's BPA skill category listing and a lump-sum, fixed-price, level-of-effort price for a draft task order. Non-price factors were equal to one another and, combined, of greater weight than price. The importance of price was to increase with the degree of equality of the quotations under the non-price factors. The agency received nine quotations and, after the initial evaluation, five--including Zolon's and Vistronix's--were evaluated as strong, and included in the competitive range. The competitive range vendors were invited to make an oral presentation, which was evaluated along with final proposal revisions (FPR) from each. Vistronix's and two other vendors' quotations were evaluated as –strong proposal, few weaknesses.— Technical Evaluation Board (TEB) Report at 00381.