Spectrum Comm, Inc

B-412395.2 Mar 04, 2016 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Spectrum Comm, Inc. (Spectrum) of Newport News, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 8 to Jacobs Technology, Inc. (Jacobs) of Lincoln, Massachusetts, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 964303, issued by the Department of the Air Force for product support services for the Air Force Wideband Enterprise Terminals (AFWET) program office. The protester challenges several aspects of the selection decision. 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:  Spectrum Comm, Inc. File:  B-412395.2 Date:  March 4, 2016 David M. Nadler, Esq., David Y. Yang, Esq., and Philip E. Beshara, Esq., Blank Rome LLP, for the protester. Robert J. Symon, Esq., Aron C. Beezley, Esq., Elizabeth A. Ferrell, Esq., and Lisa A. Markman, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for Jacobs Technology Inc., an intervenor. Maj. George M. Ebert, and Erika L. Whelan-Retta, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Young H. Cho, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest challenging selection of lower-rated, lower-priced quotation is denied where the agency’s source selection authority considered the technical differences between the two vendors’ quotations but determined that the superiority of the higher-rated, higher-priced quotation was not worth paying the associated price premium. 2.  Protest arguing that the selection official raised the awardee’s past performance rating during corrective action without explanation or support in the record is denied where the record shows that the selection official’s rating was reasonable. DECISION Spectrum Comm, Inc. (Spectrum) of Newport News, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 8 to Jacobs Technology, Inc. (Jacobs) of Lincoln, Massachusetts, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 964303, issued by the Department of the Air Force for product support services for the Air Force Wideband Enterprise Terminals (AFWET) program office.  The protester challenges several aspects of the selection decision.  We deny the protest. The RFQ was issued on June 5, 2015, through the General Services Administration (GSA) e-buy system under the procedures of FAR subpart 8.4 to vendors holding contracts under the GSA’s professional engineering services schedule.  The RFQ sought product support services for the AFWET program[1] office on Hanscom Air Force Base, its associated geographically-separated units, and operating locations.  RFQ at 1.[2]  The RFQ contemplated award of a single task order with a base period of six months and five six­-month option periods.  Id.  Award was to be made on a best-value basis, considering the following factors, listed in descending order of importance:  mission capability, past performance, and price.  See id. at 2.  The non-price factors, when combined, were stated to be significantly more important than price; however, the RFQ stated that price would “contribute substantially to the selection decision.”  Id. The RFQ’s performance work statement (PWS) described the scope of required services, including, for example, such services as implementation of project management, integration of diverse implementation efforts, and installation expertise to ensure systems are installed correctly.  RFQ, PWS at 4.  The PWS identified nine specific functions or positions for which the contractor was to provide “trained and capable individuals.”  Id. at 6.  To address these positions, vendors were required to submit only their “GSA schedule labor category/codes and position descriptions.”[3]  RFQ at 3.  The RFQ stated that mission capability would be “measured by how well the labor codes and descriptions selected by the offerors match Government requirements as detailed in the PWS.”[4]  Id.