OGSystems, LLC

B-417026.5,B-417026.6 Jul 16, 2019 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights OGSystems, LLC (OGS), of Chantilly, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Higgins, Hermansen, Banikas, LLC (HHB), of Springfield, Virginia, by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), under fair opportunity proposal request (FOPR) No. HM0476-18-D-0004, to support the agency's Security and Installation Office (SIO). The protester argues that the agency unreasonably evaluated the awardee's technical proposal and made an unreasonable award decision. We deny the protest. 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: OGSystems, LLC File: B-417026.5; B-417026.6 Date: July 16, 2019 Cameron Hamrick, Esq., C. Peter Dungan, Esq., Jason A. Blindauer, Esq., and Christopher S. Denny, Esq., Miles & Stockbridge P.C., for the protester. Peter B. Ford, Esq., Timothy F. Valley, Esq., and Meghan F. Leemon, Esq., PilieroMazza PLLC, for the intervenor. Kenneth W. Sachs, Esq., and Daniel Lamb, Esq., National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, for the agency. Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., and Laura Eyester, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest challenging the agency's reevaluation of the awardee's proposal as part of corrective action in response to a decision issued by our Office sustaining an earlier protest is denied where the record shows that the new evaluation was reasonable and adequately documented. 2. Protest challenging the award decision is denied where agency's comparisons of the protester's higher-rated technical proposal to the awardee's lower-rated technical proposal are reasonable in light of the agency's conclusion that the advantages associated with the protester's proposal were not worth a price premium of 25 percent. DECISION OGSystems, LLC (OGS), of Chantilly, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Higgins, Hermansen, Banikas, LLC (HHB), of Springfield, Virginia, by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), under fair opportunity proposal request (FOPR) No. HM0476-18-D-0004, to support the agency's Security and Installation Office (SIO). The protester argues that the agency unreasonably evaluated the awardee's technical proposal and made an unreasonable award decision. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND NGA issued the solicitation on July 6, 2018, to firms holding one of the agency's multiple-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts, known as MOJAVE. Agency Report (AR)1, Tab A.1, FOPR Cover Letter, at 1; Tab A3.b, FOPR Amend. 12, at 1. The awardee will be required to provide support for day-to-day operations at NGA's East Campus in Springfield, Virginia; the awardee will also provide engineering and base operations support, strategic facilities planning, space management, project approval, project management, architectural and interior design, space data accountability, computer-aided facility management, and furniture implementation and management. AR, Tab A.4.b, Revised Performance Work Statement (PWS)3, at 4-6. The solicitation anticipated the issuance of a fixed-price task order with a base period of 1 year and four 1-year options. FOPR at 5-6; PWS at 6. OGS is the incumbent for "much of the work" covered by the FOPR. Protest (B-417026 et al.) at 2; see Contracting Officer's Statement/Memorandum of Law (COS/MOL) (B-417026 et al.) at 9. The FOPR advised offerors4 that proposals would be evaluated on the basis of two factors: technical and price. FOPR at 8. The technical evaluation factor had three equally-weighted subfactors, which aligned to the three primary areas of support to be provided to the SIO: (1) east operations division support, (2) space and interiors division support, and (3) property division support. Id. For each subfactor, the agency advised that proposals must address the following areas for evaluation: The Offeror shall propos[e] a detailed approach for accomplishing the scope of work as described in [the PWS sections relevant to each subfactor]. The Offeror shall describe the team organization, labor categories, and overall approach (Offerors may include past/current experience related to the PWS) to supporting [the relevant PWS section]. The Offeror shall use the attached Staffing Plan matrix template which will be used by the Government as part of the evaluation. Id. For purposes of award, the technical factor was "significantly more important" than price. Id. at 7. NGA received proposals from two offerors, OGS and HHB, by the initial closing date of August 6. AR, Tab J.1, Initial Fair Opportunity Decision Document (FODD), at 1. As discussed below, the agency evaluated the offerors' proposals and conducted interchanges5 with the offerors. Id.