Suntek Systems, Inc.

B-412265 Dec 22, 2015 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Suntek Systems, Inc., of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, a small business, protests the decision of the Department of the Army, Mission and Installation Contracting Command Center, Fort Bragg, and the Small Business Administration (SBA) to place a requirement for advanced civil information management training under the SBA's section 8(a) business development program through the issuance of request for proposals (RFP) No. W91247-15-R-0056. Suntek argues that the SBA improperly accepted this requirement into the 8(a) program without first determining whether acceptance would adversely impact small businesses, such as the protester. We dismiss the protest. We dismiss 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:  Suntek Systems, Inc. File:  B-412265 Date:  December 22, 2015 Christopher R. Shiplett, Esq., Nishat Azam, Esq., and Danielle Natasha Hart, Esq., Randolph Law, PLLC, for the protester. Scott N. Flesch, Esq., and CPT Harry M. Parent, Department of the Army, and Sam Q. Le, Esq., Small Business Administration, for the agencies. Heather Weiner, Esq., and Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that the Small Business Administration (SBA) improperly accepted a requirement into the 8(a) program without first determining whether doing so would have an adverse impact on existing small business concerns is dismissed as untimely where the record shows that the protester knew or should have known of the factual basis for this allegation more than 10 days prior to raising it. DECISION Suntek Systems, Inc., of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, a small business, protests the decision of the Department of the Army, Mission and Installation Contracting Command Center, Fort Bragg, and the Small Business Administration (SBA) to place a requirement for advanced civil information management training under the SBA’s section 8(a) business development program through the issuance of request for proposals (RFP) No. W91247-15-R-0056.  Suntek argues that the SBA improperly accepted this requirement into the 8(a) program without first determining whether acceptance would adversely impact small businesses, such as the protester. We dismiss the protest. BACKGROUND On August 31, 2015, the Army offered its requirement for advanced civil information management training to the SBA for award through SBA’s 8(a) program.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 8, Agency’s Offering Letter (Aug. 31, 2015).  In response, the SBA contacted the agency contracting officer for additional information about the requirement.[1]  SBA’s Comments (Nov. 16, 2015), at 1.  On September 2, the agency provided the SBA with a revised offering letter for the requirement.  AR, Tab 10, Revised Offering Letter (Sept. 2, 2015).  Specifically, the Army’s revised letter stated that the requirement was a “new” requirement, with an anticipated dollar value of $3,819,335.40.  Id. at 1.  The letter also stated that the agency anticipated award of a contract on a sole-source basis to a particular 8(a) company.[2]  On September 2, the SBA notified the Army that the requirement had been accepted into the 8(a) program.  AR, Tab 11, SBA’s Acceptance Letter (Sept. 2, 2015), at 1.  On September 11, the Army issued the RFP for the requirement as a sole-source set-aside under SBA’s 8(a) program.  RFP at 1.  The solicitation anticipated the award of a fixed‑price, indefinite‑delivery, indefinite-quantity contract, for a base ordering period, with one 12-month optional ordering period.  Id. at 1-2.  As relevant here, the solicitation included Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) clause 252.219‑7009, section 8(a) Direct Award, which states that “[t]his contract is issued as a direct award between the contracting office and the 8(a) Contractor pursuant to the Partnership Agreement between the [SBA] and the Department of Defense.”  RFP at 64.  Proposals were due by September 18.  Id. On September 14, Suntek e-mailed the Army, asking for information regarding the requirement.  AR, Tab 14, Protester Email Chain (Sept. 14-17, 2015), at 3. Specifically, the protester stated: This is an official Request for Information on the intent of Fort Bragg MICC to solicit/award the Advanced Civil Information Management (ACIM) Training contract as a Sole Source 8a Contract . . .