MIRACORP, Inc.

B-416917 Jan 02, 2019 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights MIRACORP, Inc., a small business located in Gilbert, Arizona, protests the issuance of a delivery order to RiVidium, Inc., an 8(a) small business located in Manassas, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 89503118RWA000008, issued by the Department of Energy (DOE), for administrative support services. MIRACORP, which is the incumbent contractor for the requirement, challenges the agency's evaluation and award decision. We dismiss the protest on the basis that the protester is not an interested party to challenge the order. We dismiss the protest on the basis that the protester is not an interested party to challenge the order. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This version, with no redactions, has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: MIRACORP, Inc. File: B-416917 Date: January 2, 2019 Thomas K. David, Esq., Kenneth Brody, Esq., and Katherine David, Esq., David, Brody & Dondershine, LLP, for the protester. James Y. Boland, Esq., and Spencer P. Williams, Esq., Venable LLP, for RiVidium, Inc., the intervenor. John L. Bowles, Esq., and Stephanie B. Young, Esq., Department of Energy, and Sam Le, Esq., Small Business Administration, for the agencies. Heather Weiner, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protester is not an interested party to challenge issuance of a delivery order set aside for participants in the Small Business Administration's 8(a) program where the delivery order was issued under a multiple-award contract not initially set aside for 8(a) competition, and where the protester had graduated from the 8(a) program, and therefore, was not an 8(a) program participant eligible for award on the date specified in the solicitation for receipt of quotations. DECISION MIRACORP, Inc., a small business located in Gilbert, Arizona, protests the issuance of a delivery order to RiVidium, Inc., an 8(a) small business located in Manassas, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 89503118RWA000008, issued by the Department of Energy (DOE), for administrative support services. MIRACORP, which is the incumbent contractor for the requirement, challenges the agency's evaluation and award decision. We dismiss the protest on the basis that the protester is not an interested party to challenge the order. BACKGROUND On July 20, 2018, DOE issued the solicitation, which was set aside for Small Business Administration (SBA) 8(a) business development (BD) program participants, and limited to holders of General Services Administration (GSA) Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) Professional Services Schedule (PSS) contracts. RFQ at 1, 8. The RFQ anticipated the issuance of a single, fixed-price delivery order to the vendor whose quotation was found to offer the best value to the government. RFQ at 13. The agency received quotations from eight vendors, including RiVidium and MIRACORP, by the closing date of August 21, 2018. Protest, exh. A, Agency Award Notice, at 1; DOE Submission, Oct. 16, 2018, at 2. At that time, as relevant here, although MIRACORP held a PSS contract, the company had graduated from the 8(a) program on February 22, 2017. DOE Update, attach. 1, MIRACORP SBA Profile, at 2; attach. 2, MIRACORP PSS Contract, at 1. On September 26, DOE notified MIRACORP of its decision to issue the task order to RiVidium. Protest, exh. A, Award Notice, at 1. This protest followed. DISCUSSION MIRACORP challenges DOE's evaluation of its and the awardee's quotations, and argues that the agency's source selection determination was unreasonable. DOE and the intervenor argue that, under our Office's bid protest regulations, MIRACORP does not qualify as an interested party. Specifically, DOE and RiVidium contend that, because the RFQ was set aside for 8(a) program participants, and the protester had graduated from the 8(a) program at the time quotations were due, MIRACORP was not an 8(a) firm eligible to receive the order, and therefore, is not an interested party to challenge the agency's evaluation and award decision under the RFQ. For the reasons discussed below, we conclude that the protester is not an interested party and dismiss the protest on this basis. MIRACORP acknowledges that the solicitation was restricted to 8(a) program participants. Protest at 3-4. MIRACORP also acknowledges that it graduated from the 8(a) program on February 22, 2017. Protester's Reply (Oct. 15, 2018), at 5. The protester asserts, however, that it retains its 8(a) status, despite graduating from the program, because it was an 8(a) firm at the time it was initially awarded its PSS contract.