Smartronix, Inc.

B-413721.2 Feb 22, 2017 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Smartronix, Inc., a small business of Hollywood, Maryland, protests the issuance of a task order to Atlantic CommTech Corporation, of Norfolk, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8307-16-R-0088, issued by the Department of the Air Force for maintenance support services for the cyberspace vulnerability assessment/hunter (CVA/H) weapon system. Smartronix challenges the agency's cost evaluation. 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:  Smartronix, Inc. File:  B-413721.2 Date:  February 22, 2017 James H. Roberts III, Esq., Van Scoyoc Roberts PLLC, for the protester. Lt Col Kevin P. Stiens, Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Noah B. Bleicher, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging agency’s cost realism analysis and adjustment to protester’s proposed costs is denied where the record shows that the agency performed a reasonable cost evaluation. DECISION Smartronix, Inc., a small business of Hollywood, Maryland, protests the issuance of a task order to Atlantic CommTech Corporation, of Norfolk, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8307-16-R-0088, issued by the Department of the Air Force for maintenance support services for the cyberspace vulnerability assessment/hunter (CVA/H) weapon system.  Smartronix challenges the agency’s cost evaluation. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The Air Force issued the solicitation on May 10, 2016, as a request for proposals (RFP) to small businesses holding Network-Centric Solutions-2 (NETCENTS‑2) indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts.  The RFP contemplated the issuance of a task order with cost-plus-fixed-fee and cost‑reimbursement line items pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 16.5 for a 1-year base period and two option years.  RFP at 1.  A performance work statement (PWS) outlined the hardware and software maintenance tasks the contractor would perform for CVA/H’s 12 cyber protection teams located at Joint Base San Antonio in Texas and Scott Air Force Base in Illinois.[1]  PWS ¶ 2.  In this regard, the PWS identified more than 40 specific system sustainment tasks that ranged from maintenance of data files and existing systems to system security, troubleshooting assistance, and deployment of new capabilities.[2]  Id. ¶ 3.1.  The PWS advised that during performance of the order, the number of involved systems would increase and the configuration of the system would “evolve significantly.”  Id., Executive Summary, at 1.  As a result, the PWS warned that the level of expertise required to fulfill the requirement was very high and the contractor’s “ability to increase and decrease the number of staff to match the dynamic support requirements [was] critical.”  Id.  The PWS also provided contractor personnel staffing estimates, which identified 32 full time equivalent (FTE) staff for both the base year and the first option year, and 60 FTEs for the second option year, as well as an additional eight FTEs for support of the information operations fly-away kit (IOP-FAK).[3]  Id. ¶¶ 3.1.3.1, 3.1.3.2. The RFP provided that the task order would be issued on a lowest-priced, technically acceptable (LPTA) basis, in accordance with FAR § 15.101-2.  RFP amend. 0003, at 50.  First, the agency would evaluate all proposals for technical acceptability; proposals rated technically unacceptable would not be evaluated further.[4]  Id.  Next, the Air Force would calculate a most probable cost (MPC) for each offer and rank all technically acceptable proposals by the government-estimated MPC.[5]  Id.  Pursuant to the RFP, the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest MPC would receive the task order.  Id. The RFP instructed offerors to submit separate technical and cost proposals.  As relevant here, offerors’ cost proposals were to include total proposed costs/prices for each of the dozen contract line item numbers identified in the solicitation, as well as a cost spreadsheet that detailed proposed labor categories, labor rates, and labor hours, among other data.  Id. at 48-49; RFP, attach. 4, Cost Proposal.  The Air Force would evaluate cost/price proposals for reasonableness, realism, completeness, balance, and accuracy using the cost/price analysis techniques outlined in FAR § 15.404.  RFP amend. 0003, at 53.  The RFP warned that “unrealistically low or high proposed costs or prices” could be grounds for eliminating a proposal from the competition.  Id.