Technica Corporation

B-413339 Sep 19, 2016 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Technica Corporation, of Dulles, Virginia, protests the terms of request for quotations (RFQ) No. 1096408, which was issued by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), Defense Information Technology Contracting Organization, for solution engineering and implementation support services. Technica argues that the solicitation improperly provides for award to the vendor that submits the lowest-priced, technically-acceptable (LPTA) quotation. The protester also argues that the agency improperly rejected its quotation on the basis that the protester failed to recertify its small business size status and is therefore not eligible to compete for the award of the task order. 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:  Technica Corporation File:  B-413339 Date:  September 19, 2016 Jerald S. Howe Jr., Esq., Samuel W. Jack, Esq., Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP, for the protester. LaTonya McFadden, Esq., Defense Information Systems Agency, for the agency. Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., and Laura Eyester, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest challenging the agency’s interpretation of a solicitation as requiring vendors to recertify their small business status as of the time for submission of quotations for a task order is denied where a solicitation amendment reasonably advised vendors of this requirement. 2.  Protest challenging the basis for award set forth in a solicitation is dismissed where the protester is not an interested party because the agency rejected the protester’s quotation for failing to recertify its small business status.  DECISION Technica Corporation, of Dulles, Virginia, protests the terms of request for quotations (RFQ) No. 1096408, which was issued by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), Defense Information Technology Contracting Organization, for solution engineering and implementation support services.  Technica argues that the solicitation improperly provides for award to the vendor that submits the lowest-priced, technically-acceptable (LPTA) quotation.  The protester also argues that the agency improperly rejected its quotation on the basis that the protester failed to recertify its small business size status and is therefore not eligible to compete for the award of the task order. We deny the protest in part and dismiss it in part. BACKGROUND The RFQ was issued on June 1, 2016, and sought quotations to provide solution engineering and implementation support for DISA’s Services Directorate and Mission Partner Engagement Office.  The RFQ was issued under the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4 and was limited to vendors holding contracts under FSS schedule 70 for information technology.  RFQ at 1.  The RFQ anticipates the issuance of a fixed-price task order with a 1-year base period and two 1-year options.  Id.  The RFQ provides for award to the vendor that submitted the LPTA quotation.  Id. The RFQ was set aside for small business vendors and stated that the applicable North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for the procurement is 541519, with a corresponding size standard of $27.5 million.  RFQ at 1; RFQ amend. 002 at 1.  In addition, RFQ amendment 004, which addresses questions submitted by prospective vendors, included the following question and answer (Q&A) regarding vendors’ size status:  “[Question 1:]  Will the prime offeror be required to certify as a small business at the time of submission for [this solicitation] . . . [Answer 1:]  Yes.”  RFQ amend. 004, attach. 8, at 1. Prior to the quotation due date of July 1, Technica filed this protest challenging the solicitation’s use of an LPTA award basis.  Technica also submitted a timely quotation in response to the RFQ.  The protester raises two primary arguments:  (1) FAR subpart 8.4 does not authorize competitions for orders on an LPTA award basis, and (2) the requirements of the RFQ are too complex and high-risk to justify the award of a task order on an LPTA basis.  Protest at 5-8.  In the alternative, the protester argues that the solicitation’s evaluation criteria are vague and do not provide adequate detail regarding the agency’s requirements.  Id.