SupplyCore, Inc.

B-411648 Sep 18, 2015 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights S&K Aerospace, LLC, of St. Ignatius, Montana, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8630-14-R-5030, issued by the Department of the Air Force for the Parts and Repair Ordering System (PROS). S&K contends that the agency improperly disclosed its proprietary pricing data under the incumbent PROS contract. 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:  S&K Aerospace, LLC File:  B-411648 Date:  September 18, 2015 Pamela J. Mazza, Esq., Michelle E. Litteken, Esq., Megan C. Connor, Esq., and Jacqueline K. Unger, Esq., Piliero Mazza PLLC, for the protester. Richard B. O’Keeffe, Jr., Esq., William A. Roberts III, Esq., and Samantha S. Lee, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, for URS Federal Services, Inc., the intervenor. Capt. Christopher M. Kovach, and Sarah L. Stanton, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Cherie J. Owen, Esq., and David A. Ashen, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency unreasonably concluded that agency’s inadvertent disclosure of protester’s price information under prior incumbent contract did not result in an unfair competition is denied where the protester has failed to demonstrate that it was competitively harmed. DECISION S&K Aerospace, LLC, of St. Ignatius, Montana, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8630-14-R-5030, issued by the Department of the Air Force for the Parts and Repair Ordering System (PROS).  S&K contends that the agency improperly disclosed its proprietary pricing data under the incumbent PROS contract. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The Parts and Repair Ordering System includes logistics supply support (parts, support equipment, components, and end items), maintenance support (repair, upgrade, and overhaul), and analytical/technical services for foreign military sales partners.  RFP at 115; see Contracting Officer’s (CO) Statement at 3.  The PROS prime contractor receives requisitions from foreign military sales customers and is responsible for purchasing non-standard and difficult-to-purchase standard supply items, maintenance and repair services, and the management of task orders for installation, studies, analysis, technical support, and training.[1]  RFP at 113. The Air Force Security Assistance and Cooperation Directorate issued the PROS V solicitation on April 20, 2015.  The solicitation envisions the award of a single indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ) contract with a base period of five years and five one-year options, followed by a five-year closeout period.  RFP at 4.  The contract has an estimated value of $4.2 billion.  Id.  The agency refers to the current procurement as the PROS V procurement, and the prior procurement of these items and services as the PROS IV procurement.  Id. at 4, 7. The RFP includes both fixed-price and cost-reimbursable contract line item numbers (CLINs).  RFP at 2‑38.  The RFP requires offerors to provide proposed prices or costs for various CLINs including, for example:  fill fees; cancellation fees; travel costs; research fees; material, PCH&T (packing, crating, handling, and transportation), and storage costs; expedite order fees; and contingency operations fees.  RFP at 2-38; see also CO Statement at 5-6. On May 8, URS Federal Services, Inc., an AECOM company (AECOM) and a potential offeror, sent a letter to the agency notifying it that a member of the company’s proposal team had unlocked a password-protected pricing matrix that was included as part of the RFP, which revealed “information that might include Government cost or price data.”  AR, Tab 86, AECOM Letter to Agency, May 8, 2015, at 1.  Specifically, AECOM’s letter stated: I write to inform you that a member of our proposal team inadvertently gained access to what may possibly include government internal information embedded in a supporting document. . . .  [A] member of our proposal team . . . was working on our price proposal.  In order to facilitate her work, [she] attempted to import the data from the Pricing Matrix to [our] pricing model.  [The employee] wanted to import the data directly in order to eliminate the risk of any error that might result from transcribing the Pricing Matrix information manually or in cutting-and-pasting the individual fields.  The Pricing Matrix, however, was secured and she was not able to import the data directly. In order to defeat the password, [the employee] used a publicly available application to defeat the password to access the Pricing Matrix.