Octo Consulting Group, Inc.

B-416097.5 Feb 28, 2019 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Octo Consulting Group, Inc., a small business of Reston, Virginia, requests that we reconsider our decision in Octo Consulting Group, Inc., B-416097.3, B-416097.4, Sept. 24, 2018, 2018 CPD ¶ 339, in which we denied Octo's protest challenging the Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue Service's (IRS), establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) to Northrop Grumman, of McLean, Virginia, pursuant to request for quotations (RFQ) No. TIRNO-18-Q-00002, which was issued against General Services Administration's Federal Supply Schedule 70 for information technology services in support of the HRConnect human resource management system. Octo argues that our decision contained errors of fact and law that warrant reconsideration. We deny the request for reconsideration. 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:  Octo Consulting Group, Inc.--Reconsideration File:  B-416097.5 Date:  February 28, 2019 Aron C. Beezley, Esq., Lisa A. Markman, Esq., Sarah S. Osborne, Esq., and Marcus Augustine, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for the protester. Deneen J. Melander, Esq., Lanora C. Pettit, Esq., Lukman Azeez, Esq., and Richard Sauber, Esq., Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck, Untereiner & Sauber LLP, for Northrop Grumman, the intervenor. Richard  L. Hatfield, Esq., Kelly Zeng, Esq., and Holly H. Styles, Esq., Department of the Treasury, 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 Request for reconsideration is denied where the requesting party has not shown that our decision contains errors of fact or law that warrant reversal or modification of the decision. DECISION Octo Consulting Group, Inc., a small business of Reston, Virginia, requests that we reconsider our decision in Octo Consulting Group, Inc., B-416097.3, B-416097.4, Sept. 24, 2018, 2018 CPD ¶ 339, in which we denied Octo’s protest challenging the Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS), establishment of a blanket purchase agreement (BPA) to Northrop Grumman, of McLean, Virginia, pursuant to request for quotations (RFQ)[1] No. TIRNO-18-Q-00002, which was issued against General Services Administration’s Federal Supply Schedule 70 for information technology services in support of the HRConnect human resource management system.  Octo argues that our decision contained errors of fact and law that warrant reconsideration. We deny the request for reconsideration. BACKGROUND The acquisition was conducted pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) section 8.405-3 to establish a single BPA with a 1‑year base period and four 1-year option periods.  RFQ at 2; Agency Report (AR), Tab 7b, Revised Source Selection Decision (SSD), at 9.  The RFQ provided that the initial task order would be issued on a fixed-price basis and further task orders would be issued on either a fixed‑price or a labor-hour basis.  RFQ at 2.  The RFQ provided that award would be made on the basis of a best-value tradeoff between price and the following technical factors listed in descending order of importance:  (1) technical quality; (2) corporate experience and key personnel; and (3) socioeconomic status.  Id. at 180-181.  All technical factors when combined were more important than price.  Id. The IRS received quotations from six vendors, including Octo and Northrop, and ultimately made award to Northrop on February 16, 2018.  Contracting Officer Statement (COS) at 3-4.  Octo filed a protest with our Office on March 5, and on March 23, the IRS advised our Office that it intended to take corrective action.  Id. at 4.  The agency, in implementing its corrective action, reevaluated quotations resulting in the following ratings assigned to the Octo and Northrop quotations:     Octo Consulting Group Northrop Grumman Technical Quality Marginal Good Corporate Experience and Key Personnel Good Excellent Socioeconomic Status Excellent Good Price $52,998,498 $60,933,727 AR, Tab 7b, Revised SSD, at 22 On the basis of this evaluation, the agency concluded that Northrop’s quotation provided the best value to the agency, and sent an unsuccessful vendor notice to Octo on June 6.  Id.