Advanced Technology Systems, Inc.

B-413291 Sep 28, 2016 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Advanced Technology Systems, Inc. (ATS), of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the issuance of a work order to Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies (SGT), of Greenbelt, Maryland, under work order request (WOR) No. PBGC01-RP-16-0010, issued by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), for business management application (BMA) suite support. ATS protests the evaluation of proposals and the source selection decision, primarily arguing that its proposal was improperly found to be unacceptable because it submitted a required performance work statement (PWS) as a table, rather than a narrative description. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. 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:  Advanced Technology Systems, Inc. File:  B-413291 Date:  September 28, 2016 Lawrence P. Block, Esq., and Elizabeth G. Leavy, Esq., Reed Smith LLP, for the protester.  James H. Roberts, III, Esq., Van Scoyoc Kelly & Roberts PLLC, for Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies, an intervenor.  Ryan Carpenter, Esq., Kristen Zearfoss, Esq., and Kimberly Manganello, Esq., Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 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 Protest that proposal was improperly found unacceptable for failing to submit a mandatory performance work statement and deliverables schedule is denied where the record shows that the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Advanced Technology Systems, Inc. (ATS), of Fairfax, Virginia, protests the issuance of a work order to Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies (SGT), of Greenbelt, Maryland, under work order request (WOR) No. PBGC01-RP-16-0010, issued by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), for business management application (BMA) suite support.  ATS protests the evaluation of proposals and the source selection decision, primarily arguing that its proposal was improperly found to be unacceptable because it submitted a required performance work statement (PWS) as a table, rather than a narrative description. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part.  BACKGROUND PBGC is a government-owned corporation established under Title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to protect the defined benefit pension plans of more than 40 million workers and retirees.  Agency Report (AR), Contracting Officer’s Statement of Facts (COS) at 1.  This procurement is for support services for the BMA suite of applications supporting PBGC’s Office of Benefits Administration.  Id.; WOR[1] at 6-8.  The purpose of the BMA suite of applications is to manage and report on participant and beneficiary information, and provide business users with an automated method of facilitating the administration of benefits.  Id. The solicitation was issued on January 20, 2016, to firms with which an information solutions and engineering services 2 (ISES 2) flexible ordering agreement (FOA) had been established under the National Institutes of Health, Chief Information Officer-Solutions and Partners 3 (CIO-SP3), government-wide acquisition contract (GWAC).[2]  WOR at 1; AR, COS at 1.  The solicitation contemplated the award of a single fixed-price work order with a one-year base period and three 12-month option periods.  See WOR at 3; AR, COS at 1.  Award was to be made on a best-value basis, considering price and the following equally‑weighted technical factors:  technical approach; experience of key personnel and adequacy of staffing plan; and past performance.  WOR at 25.  Technical quality was significantly more important than price.  Id.  The solicitation advised that the agency intended to evaluate offers and make award without discussions, and cautioned that an initial offer should therefore contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint.  Id. The WOR advised in a statement of objectives (SOO) that this procurement is “to acquire software developmental, operational and maintenance services, and production support services for the BMA suite for the PBGC.”  Id., SOO at 11.  Among other things, the SOO outlined the high-level components of the BMA suite; identified the scope of the requirement; and described six specific objectives, with details about their minimum respective requirements.  See id.