CDO Technologies, Inc.

B-416989 Nov 01, 2018 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights CDO Technologies, Inc., a small business, of Dayton, Ohio, protests the award of a task order to Atlantic CommTech Corporation (ACT), a small business, of Norfolk, Virginia, under Fair Opportunity Proposal Request (FOPR) No. FA4890-18-R-0011, which was issued by the Department of the Air Force, for communications engineering and installation (E&I) program support for the U.S. Air Force Central Command (USAFCENT). CDO alleges that the agency conducted an unreasonable price realism evaluation of ACT's proposal and failed to adequately assess the performance risk associated with ACT's unrealistic proposed price. We dismiss the protest because it is untimely where it was filed more than 10 days after CDO knew or reasonably should have known the bases for its protest. We dismiss the protest because it is untimely where it was filed more than 10 days after CDO knew or reasonably should have known the bases for its protest. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of:  CDO Technologies, Inc. File:  B-416989 Date:  November 1, 2018 Katherine S. Nucci, Esq., and Scott F. Lane, Esq., Thompson Coburn LLP, and Tara L. Ward, Esq., and William A. Roberts III, Esq., Wiley Rein LLP, for the protester. Lieutenant Colonel Kevin P. Stiens, Michelle Gregory, Esq., and Alexis J. Bernstein, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Evan D. Wesser, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s price realism and technical risk evaluation is dismissed as untimely where the protester waited until more than a month after the close of its debriefing to receive confirming information to support its allegations which were knowable or should have been knowable at the time the protester received its debriefing. DECISION CDO Technologies, Inc., a small business, of Dayton, Ohio, protests the award of a task order to Atlantic CommTech Corporation (ACT), a small business, of Norfolk, Virginia, under Fair Opportunity Proposal Request (FOPR) No. FA4890-18-R-0011, which was issued by the Department of the Air Force, for communications engineering and installation (E&I) program support for the U.S. Air Force Central Command (USAFCENT).  CDO alleges that the agency conducted an unreasonable price realism evaluation of ACT’s proposal and failed to adequately assess the performance risk associated with ACT’s unrealistic proposed price. We dismiss the protest because it is untimely where it was filed more than 10 days after CDO knew or reasonably should have known the bases for its protest. BACKGROUND On March 30, 2018, the Air Force issued the FOPR in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) § 16.505 procedures under the NETCENTS-2 Small Business Pool NetOps indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract.  FOPR at 1.[1]  The FOPR sought proposals for communications E&I program support in the USAFCENT area of responsibility, which includes the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Jordan, Qatar, and other locations as necessary to meet mission requirements.  Id.  The FOPR contemplated the award of a hybrid fixed-price and cost-reimbursable type order, with a 90 day transition period, a 1-year base period, and four, 1-year option periods.  Id., attach. No. 7, Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Structure for E&I Base Year through Option Period 4. Award was to be made on the basis of a best-value tradeoff, considering technical, past performance, and price.  FOPR at 2.  The technical factor included three equally-weighted subfactors:  management plan and staffing approach; special projects; and transition plan.  Id.  The technical factor was more important than past performance, and past performance was more important than price.  Id.  The non-cost factors, when combined, were significantly more important than price.  Id. As relevant to the decision, the FOPR established that the Air Force would evaluate proposed prices for reasonableness, realism, and balance.  Id.  The FOPR included a fixed-price CLIN for transition, and six identical CLINs for each of the base and option periods.  For example, for the base period the FOPR included a fixed-price CLIN for core labor, and five cost-reimbursable CLINs for travel, other direct costs, special projects, material/equipment, and future operational labor.  For each of the five cost-reimbursable CLINs, the agency directed offerors to use plug numbers, which the agency provided.  The same CLIN structure applied in the option periods.  See id. at 10‑11; attach. No.