Viatech, Inc.

B-411388 Jul 21, 2015 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Viatech, Inc., of Eatontown, New Jersey, protests the Department of the Army's issuance of a task order to ManTech Sensor Technologies, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for task execution plan (RTEP) No. W56KGYS3R1044, for worldwide sustainment support services for the Logistics Readiness Center (LRC) - Field Support Directorate (FSD) for the Program Manager (PM) Joint Personnel Identification (JPI) Quick Reaction Capability (QRC). The protester asserts that the Army improperly evaluated its cost as undeterminable. We deny the protest. We deny the protest. View Decision 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: Viatech, Inc. File: B-411388 Date: July 21, 2015 Jonathan D. Shaffer, Esq., Mary Pat Buckenmeyer, Esq., and Nicholas J. Surace, Esq., Smith Pachter McWhorter PLC, for the protester. Paul F. Khoury, Esq., Brian G. Walsh, Esq., and J. Ryan Frazee, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, for ManTech Sensor Technologies, Inc., the intervenor. Michael J. Kraycinovich, Esq., and Paul L. Harris, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Kenneth Kilgour, Esq., and David A. Ashen, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that the agency improperly concluded the protester’s probable cost of performing a cost-reimbursement contract could not be determined is denied where the agency reasonably concluded that the protester’s cost proposal was ambiguous as to how the contract work would be allocated among team members with materially different cost structures. DECISION Viatech, Inc., of Eatontown, New Jersey, protests the Department of the Army’s issuance of a task order to ManTech Sensor Technologies, Inc., of Fairfax, Virginia, under request for task execution plan (RTEP) No. W56KGYS3R1044, for worldwide sustainment support services for the Logistics Readiness Center (LRC) - Field Support Directorate (FSD) for the Program Manager (PM) Joint Personnel Identification (JPI) Quick Reaction Capability (QRC). The protester asserts that the Army improperly evaluated its cost as undeterminable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RTEP, issued to contract holders under the Strategic Services Sourcing (S3) multiple-award, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) contract, provided for the issuance of what the agency has designated as a single, “cost-plus fixed-fee, term form (CPFF-TF) task order,” for a base year with one option year, to furnish services, hardware and software for biometrics collection, storage, matching and analysis in a forward operating environment. RFP at 1. The task order was to be issued to the offeror whose proposal represented the best value to the government, considering the following three evaluation factors: technical, cost, and past performance. Amended RTEP at 25. The technical factor was significantly more important than cost, while cost was slightly more important than the past performance factor; technical and past performance, when combined, were significantly more important than cost. Id. The RTEP provided that the government would evaluate the realism of the offeror’s proposed costs in relation to the offeror’s specific technical approach by determining what the government predicts will be the most probable cost of the offeror’s approach. The RTEP further provided that, to the degree that the government’s most probable cost estimate differed from the offeror’s proposed cost, the proposed cost may be adjusted for the purposes of evaluation. Amended RTEP at 26. The RTEP, however, cautioned that: Proposals with unclear, inconsistent or missing information may be judged to mean the offeror does not fully understand the requirements or understand what it takes to meet or exceed the requirements. Those proposals may receive ratings of unacceptable and therefore be ineligible for award. RTEP at 21. The RTEP advised offerors that the government intended to evaluate proposals and issue a task order on the basis of initial proposals and that the offeror’s initial proposal should therefore contain the offeror’s best terms from a technical and price/cost standpoint. In this regard, the RTEP specifically informed offerors that the “[g]overnment may or may not ask questions about proposals which contain inconsistent or unclear information.” Amended RTEP at 20-21. Viatech and ManTech, both holders of an S3 contract, submitted proposals in response to the RTEP. Viatech’s proposal explained that it is a wholly owned affiliate of D&S Consultants, Inc. (DSCI), which is “[DELETED” including, in addition to Viatech: [DELETED]. Agency Report (AR), Tab 7AD, Viatech Cost Proposal, at 3.