NetCentrics Corporation

B-417285.3 Jun 05, 2019 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights NetCentrics Corporation of Herndon, Virginia, protests the decision of the Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, to rescind the order it awarded NetCentrics under request for quotations (RFQ) No. HQ0034-18-R-0044, for information technology support services. NetCentrics asserts that the agency unreasonably determined that its quotation contained a material misrepresentation regarding key personnel. 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:  NetCentrics Corporation File:  B-417285.3 Date:  June 5, 2019 Jeremy W. Dutra, Esq., Karen R. Harbaugh, Esq., and John R. Sharp, Esq., Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP, for the protester. Daniel P. Graham, Esq., Ryan D. Stalnaker, Esq., and Caroline E. Colpoys, Esq., Vinson & Elkins LLP, for the intervenor. Michael G. Anderson, Esq., Aaron Levin, Esq., and Lisa Marie Golden, Esq., Department of Defense, for the agency. Mary G. Curcio, Esq., and Laura Eyester, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency improperly rescinded a task order shortly after award is denied where, in its final quotation revision, protester misrepresented that a key person was a current employee, when in fact, the proposed key person was no longer employed by the firm. DECISION NetCentrics Corporation of Herndon, Virginia, protests the decision of the Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, to rescind the order it awarded NetCentrics under request for quotations (RFQ) No. HQ0034-18-R-0044, for information technology support services.  NetCentrics asserts that the agency unreasonably determined that its quotation contained a material misrepresentation regarding key personnel.  We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The solicitation was issued on March 22, 2018, pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 8, to vendors holding General Services Administration Information Technology Schedule 70 contracts.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, RFQ,  at 2, 83.[1]  The solicitation provided for the issuance of an order on a best-value tradeoff basis considering technical approach and capability, past performance, and price.  AR, Tab 8, RFQ amend. 7, at 1503.  As relevant to this protest, under the technical approach and capability factor, vendors were required to submit resumes for two key personnel, one of which was the deputy program manager.  AR, Tab 9, RFQ, amend. 8, at 1565, 1584.  The agency desired, but did not require, commitment letters for key personnel.  Id. at 1565.  However, the solicitation also noted that when key personnel are used as an evaluation factor in a best-value procurement, a vendor can be rejected if it does not have a firm commitment from the persons that are listed in the quotation.  Id. at 1587.  Further, the RFQ explained that the agency would evaluate the adequacy of the vendor’s technical approach and capabilities for providing the personnel matrix and key personnel resumes.  AR, Tab 8, RFQ amend. 7, at 1506.  Specifically, with respect to the staffing plan, the agency would evaluate and assess the vendor’s staffing approach, plans to manage unexpected turnover, and impact on contract performance.  Id.  NetCentrics’ initial quotation, submitted on August 10, included the resume of Mr. A for the deputy program manager position.  AR, Tab 11, NetCentrics Quotation,  at 2123-2126.  The resume indicated that Mr. A was currently employed by NetCentrics and available immediately.  Id. at 2123-2124 (showing employment status/availability as “Current Employee/Immediate”).  On November 20 and 30, the agency sent vendors discussion questions and requests for final quotation revisions.  AR, Tabs 19 and 20, Discussion Letters.  None of the questions posed to NetCentrics concerned its deputy program manager or its key personnel.  See id.  NetCentrics submitted its revised quotation on December 3 with the identical resume for Mr. A that was included in its initial quotation, which, again, showed that Mr. A was a current employee of NetCentrics and available immediately.  AR, Tab 12, NetCentrics Revised Quotation, at 2225-2226. On January 31, 2019, following the evaluation of final revisions, the agency issued an order to NetCentrics.  AR, Tab 15, Notice of Award.  On February 5, NCI Information Systems, Inc. (NCI), another vendor that responded to the solicitation, submitted a protest to our Office.  NCI argued, among other things, that NetCentrics should not have been awarded the order because it mispresented the availability of Mr. A.  NCI specifically asserted that Mr.