Arctic Slope Mission Services, LLC

B-415376 Dec 01, 2017 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Arctic Slope Mission Services, LLC, an 8(a) small business concern located in Beltsville, Maryland, protests the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) rejection of its proposal pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. NNL17ZB1002R for administrative, media, and professional support services at Langley Research Center. The protester argues that the agency's decision to eliminate Arctic Slope's proposal from the competition was unreasonable. 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:  Arctic Slope Mission Services, LLC File:  B-415376 Date:  December 1, 2017 Robert J. Symon, Esq., Aron C. Beezley, Esq., Lisa A. Markman, Esq., and Sarah S. Osborne, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for the protester. Michael I. Mark, Esq., and D. Evelyn Lyon, Esq., National Aeronautics and Space Administration, for the agency. Nora K. Adkins, Esq., and Amy B. Pereira, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging agency’s evaluation of protester’s proposal is denied where the agency reasonably concluded that the protester modified the solicitation’s pre‑populated labor categories without providing supporting rationale as required by the solicitation. DECISION Arctic Slope Mission Services, LLC, an 8(a) small business concern located in Beltsville, Maryland, protests the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) rejection of its proposal pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. NNL17ZB1002R for administrative, media, and professional support services at Langley Research Center.  The protester argues that the agency’s decision to eliminate Arctic Slope’s proposal from the competition was unreasonable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On July 14, 2017, NASA issued the solicitation as an 8(a) small business set-aside under the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 15.  RFP[1] at 1, 56.  The RFP sought support services for various NASA organizations, programs, and projects throughout NASA Langley Research Center including:  administrative support services; media support services (photography, graphics, video, printing and duplication, and digitization); professional support services (human resources support, financial management support, library and information management, and records management); and science and technical information support (communication support, public affairs and outreach, education, technology transfer, acquisition and contract management support, export control, and sign language interpreter support services).  Contracting Officer (CO) Statement at 1-2; RFP, Exh. A., Performance Work Statement. The solicitation contemplated the award of an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity fixed-price contract, with a cost-reimbursable (no-fee) contract line item for other direct costs, for a 1-year base period and four 1‑year option periods.  RFP at 10, 42.  Award would be made on the basis of a tradeoff between the past performance and price factors of technically-acceptable proposals.  Id. at 56. With respect to cost/price, the RFP provided multiple cost/price forms to be submitted by the offerors.  Id. at 49-50.  The solicitation provided detailed instructions for completing the forms and advised that an offeror’s failure to comply with all price proposal instructions could result in proposal rejection.  Id. at 49-53.  As relevant here, the RFP instructed an offeror to submit its prime labor hours and rates in form B--Prime Labor Hours & Rates.  Id. at 49-50.  This form included 36 pre-populated labor categories and required an offeror to complete the following information for each category including, as relevant here:  classifying each category as Service Contract Act (SCA) wage determination applicable or Exempt, and providing a Department of Labor (DOL) code for all wage determination categories.  Id. at 50; attach. II, Cost/Price Forms, Form B.  The RFP also advised that an offeror was permitted to modify the RFP labor categories to reflect its proposed technical approach if the offeror fully explained the rationale for proposing labor categories that differed from those in the solicitation and provided a correlation to the solicitation’s labor categories.  Id. at 50.  The agency also provided, in exhibit H, a description of the duties, qualifications, skills, and experience for each of the 36 labor categories listed in form B.  Id.; attach. II, Cost/Price Forms, Exh.