Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company

B-414802 Sep 20, 2017 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Knight Point Systems, LLC (KPS), of Reston, Virginia, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. HC1028-16-R-0012, issued by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) for communication infrastructure services. KPS contends that the RFP, as amended, is improper. 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:  Knight Point Systems, LLC File:  B-414802 Date:  September 20, 2017 Francis E. Purcell, Jr., Esq., Thomas O. Mason, Esq., Joseph R. Berger, Esq., and Raymond C. McCann, Esq., Thompson Hine LLP, for the protester. JoAnn W. Melesky, Esq., Anthony J. Balestreri, Esq., and Daniel C. McIntosh, Esq., Defense Information Systems Agency, for the agency. Paula J. Haurilesko, Esq., and Laura Eyester, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest to GAO is timely where, consistent with GAO Bid Protest Regulations and decisions, the protester filed its agency-level protest before the next closing time for receipt of proposals and filed its protest with our Office within 10 days of an adverse agency action. 2.  Protest that the agency improperly eliminated two of five technical/management subfactors is denied, where the elimination of the subfactors reflected the focus of the solicitation on the provision of services, rather than equipment. 3.  Protest that the agency unreasonably eliminated the use of pricing notes in a spreadsheet is denied, where the agency reasonably concluded that the removal of potentially hundreds of pricing notes for thousands of line items would reduce potential uncertainties during contract administration and the solicitation permitted offerors to provide explanations in a pricing narrative. DECISION Knight Point Systems, LLC (KPS), of Reston, Virginia, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. HC1028-16-R-0012, issued by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) for communication infrastructure services.  KPS contends that the RFP, as amended, is improper. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP, issued on August 2, 2016, provides for the award of a fixed-price indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract to provide state-of-the-art communications infrastructure capacity to meet new and emerging customer requirements as well as the ability to replace existing DISA communications capacity that has exceeded its technical or economic life.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 2A, RFP, at 1, 35; Section J, attach. C-1, Performance Work Statement (PWS), at 1.  The PWS states that, for all communications capacity requirements, the service provider will acquire, transport, and provide the necessary hardware, hardware maintenance, communications operating software, and service to support the communication infrastructure associated with the contract as a capacity service.  PWS at 1.  The RFP contemplates a 5-year base period and five 1-year option periods.  Id. at 24.  As relevant here, the RFP includes Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) clause 252.216-7006 - Ordering, which states in relevant part:  "Any supplies and services to be furnished under this contract shall be ordered by issuance of delivery orders or task orders by the individuals or activities designated in the contract schedule.  Such orders may be issued from date of award through the end of the base period (and any option years, if exercised)."  RFP at 24. The RFP, as originally issued, provided for award to the offeror whose proposal was the most advantageous to the government, considering two compliance requirements and the following evaluation factors:  technical/management, past performance, cost/price, and small business participation plan.  RFP at 49.  The RFP stated that all non-cost/price factors were of equal importance and that, when combined, the non-cost/price factors were approximately equal to cost/price.  Id. The technical/management factor was comprised of four equally-weighted subfactors:  physical network solutions, virtual network solutions, service delivery:  design support, and service delivery:  management.  Id.  Under the physical network solutions and virtual network solutions subfactors, the government would evaluate each offeror's ability to provide solutions that meet or exceed the technical requirements outlined by the government.  Id.