GloTech, Inc.

B-416967 Jan 15, 2019 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights GLOTECH, Inc., of Rockville, Maryland, protests the award of a contract to Facilities Development Corporation (FDC), of Reston, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. SAQMMA-17-R-0398, issued by the Department of State for information technology infrastructure rehab (ITIR) in Cairo, Egypt. The protester challenges the agency's decision to prequalify FDC to participate in the procurement. We deny the protest in part and dismiss the protest in part. 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:  GloTech, Inc. File:  B-416967 Date:  January 15, 2019 Thomas K. David, Esq., Kenneth D. Brody, Esq., and Katherine A. David, Esq., David, Brody & Dondershine, LLP, for the protester. Lawrence M. Prosen, Esq., Gunjan R. Talati, Esq., Jarret Dillard, Esq., and Nicholas J. Nieto, Esq., Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, for Facilities Development Corporation, the intervenor. Kathleen D. Martin, Esq., Department of State, for the agency. Lois Hanshaw, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s prequalification of the awardee for an overseas embassy construction project under the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986, as amended, is denied where the record shows that the awardee’s submissions satisfied the requirements of the prequalification notice. DECISION GLOTECH, Inc., of Rockville, Maryland, protests the award of a contract to Facilities Development Corporation (FDC), of Reston, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. SAQMMA-17-R-0398, issued by the Department of State for information technology infrastructure rehab (ITIR) in Cairo, Egypt.  The protester challenges the agency’s decision to prequalify FDC to participate in the procurement.  We deny the protest in part and dismiss the protest in part.  BACKGROUND On August 4, 2017, the agency issued a notice soliciting prequalification submissions from contractors for Design-Build construction services for the U.S. embassy complex in Cairo, Egypt.  See Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, Prequalification Notice, at 1.  The ITIR project would be a comprehensive replacement of VOIP (voice over internet protocol) and network cabling throughout the Cairo embassy complex, which consists of four buildings.  Id.  The project’s scope would include activities in support of the replacement project, such as construction of new telecom rooms, and modifications to electrical and mechanical systems.  Id.  The notice stated that the project would require significant use of cleared American labor and materials, and significant amounts of nighttime and weekend work.  Id. The prequalification notice explained that the project would be solicited in two phases.  Id.  Phase I was the announcement soliciting prequalification submissions.  Id. at 2.  Offerors determined to be prequalified would be issued a formal RFP for the project and would be invited to participate in a site visit and submit technical and pricing proposals in Phase II.  Id. As relevant here, the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986, as amended (Security Act) provides that as long as there is adequate competition, “only United States persons and qualified United States joint venture persons may . . . bid on a diplomatic construction or design project” that is valued at $10 million or more or involves technical security. 22 U.S.C. § 4852(a)(2).  The statute defines a “United States person” as an entity that, inter alia, has performed within the United States or at a United States diplomatic or consular establishment abroad administrative and technical, professional, or construction services similar in complexity, type of construction, and value to the project being bid.  See 22 U.S.C. § 4852(c)(2)(D).  The prequalification notice advised that prospective offerors must be “United States Person[s],” as that term is defined under the Security Act, and required that they complete and submit, as part of the offeror’s prequalification package, a completed certification pamphlet.[1]  AR, Tab 1, Prequalification Notice, at 3.  As relevant here, certification question #4 pertained to the Security Act’s similar project requirement stated above.  See AR, Tab 2, Certification Pamphlet, at 6.[2]  The certification pamphlet also provided relevant definitions applicable to this certification question.  Id. at 5.  As relevant here, the term “complexity” was defined as the physical and technical size and demands of the project.  Id.  The phrase “type of construction” was defined as the overall nature of the facilities to be built, including the kinds of materials to be used.