NLT Management Services, LLC (DJA-17-AHDQ-R-0035)

B-415936.14 Oct 05, 2020 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights NLT Management Services, LLC, of Ewing Township, New Jersey, requests that we reconsider our decision in NLT Management Services, LLC, B-415936.11 et al., June 19, 2020, 2020 CPD ¶ 217, denying its protest challenging the issuance of a task order to MartinFederal Consulting, LLC, of Huntsville, Alabama, under request for proposals (RFP) No. DJA-17-AHDQ-R-0035, issued by the Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), for forensic and scientific laboratory administrative and technical support services. NLT argues that our decision contained factual and legal errors with regard to our analysis of its challenges to the technical acceptability of MartinFederal's proposal. We deny the request for reconsideration. 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:  NLT Management Services, LLC File:  B-415936.14 Date:  October 5, 2020 Sean D. Forbes, Esq., and Bryant S. Banes, Esq., Neel, Hooper & Banes, PC, for the requester. Aron C. Beezley, Esq., Patrick R. Quigley, Esq., Sarah S. Osborne, Esq., Lisa A. Markman, Esq., and Nathaniel J. Greeson, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for MartinFederal Consulting, LLC, the intervenor. Angela R. Williams, Esq., Department of Justice, for the agency. Young H. Cho, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Request for reconsideration of a prior decision is denied where the requesting party has not shown that our decision contains either errors of fact or law or information not previously considered that warrants reversal or modification of the decision. DECISION NLT Management Services, LLC, of Ewing Township, New Jersey, requests that we reconsider our decision in NLT Management Services, LLC, B-415936.11 et al., June 19, 2020, 2020 CPD ¶ 217, denying its protest challenging the issuance of a task order to MartinFederal Consulting, LLC, of Huntsville, Alabama, under request for proposals (RFP) No. DJA-17-AHDQ-R-0035, issued by the Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), for forensic and scientific laboratory administrative and technical support services.  NLT argues that our decision contained factual and legal errors with regard to our analysis of its challenges to the technical acceptability of MartinFederal’s proposal. We deny the request for reconsideration.  BACKGROUND As explained in our decision, the RFP, issued on June 19, 2017, sought proposals from Small Business Administration 8(a) business development program participants, for administrative and technical support services for ATF’s laboratories. RFP at 1, 5.  The RFP contemplated the award of a fixed-price contract, with a base period and four 1‑year option periods.  Id. at 12.  Award was to be on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering the following four factors, which were of descending importance:  (1) technical/managerial (including corporate experience); (2) past performance; (3) personnel qualifications; and (4) price.  Id. at 26.  The non-price factors, when combined, were significantly more important than price.  Id. ATF received six proposals in response to the final amended solicitation, including proposals from MartinFederal and NLT.  The agency ultimately found that only MartinFederal’s proposal complied with the RFP’s requirements, while the other five proposals--including NLT’s proposal--were rated as technically unacceptable for failing to provide all required information or for other deficiencies.  ATF elected to make award to MartinFederal, the only technically acceptable proposal, without conducting discussions.  Following a debriefing, NLT filed its protest and two supplemental protests with our Office, which were docketed as B‑415936.11, B-415936.12, and B-415936.13.[1]  NLT, supra at 2. NLT challenged numerous aspects of the agency’s evaluation of its proposal and MartinFederal’s proposal.  Relevant here, NLT argued that the agency unreasonably found NLT’s proposal to be technically unacceptable under the personnel qualifications factor for failing to provide a resume and letter of commitment/intent for a required position.  Id. at 4.  Our Office denied this allegation, finding that the agency reasonably concluded that NLT’s proposed candidate was not exempt from the solicitation’s submission requirements as argued by the protester.  Id.