22nd Century Technologies, Inc.

B-417336,B-417336.2 May 24, 2019 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights 22nd Century Technologies, Inc., a small business of McLean, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Highlight Technologies, LLC, a small business of Fairfax, Virginia, by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 831711684 which was issued for the acquisition of information support services. The protester contends that the agency unreasonably evaluated the protester's quotation by failing to credit it with various strengths under the technical factor, that quotations were disparately evaluated, and that the agency's best-value tradeoff analysis was flawed. 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: 22nd Century Technologies, Inc. File: B-417336; B-417336.2 Date: May 24, 2019 Daniel J. Strouse, Esq., Cordatis LLP, for the protester. Colleen A. Eagan, Esq., Nati Silva, Esq., Vera A. Strebel, Esq., and Anthony J. Balestreri, Esq., Defense Information Systems Agency, for the agency. Stephanie B. Magnell, Esq., and Amy B. Pereira, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest alleging that agency unreasonably failed to assign multiple strengths to protester's quotation is denied where protester fails to demonstrate that the agency's evaluation was unreasonable. 2. Protest challenging the evaluation of quotations is denied where the awardee's superior ratings stemmed from differences in the quotations and not from disparate treatment. DECISION 22nd Century Technologies, Inc., a small business of McLean, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Highlight Technologies, LLC, a small business of Fairfax, Virginia, by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 831711684 which was issued for the acquisition of information support services. The protester contends that the agency unreasonably evaluated the protester's quotation by failing to credit it with various strengths under the technical factor, that quotations were disparately evaluated, and that the agency's best-value tradeoff analysis was flawed. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND On December 20, 2017, DISA issued the RFQ, which was set aside for small businesses, pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 16.5, to holders of the General Services Administration's (GSA) Streamlined Technology Application Resource for Services (STARS II) governmentwide acquisition contract. DISA sought to acquire support services for the DISA Global Operations Command Information Support Services at Scott Air Force Base and the Defense Enterprise Computing Center in St. Louis, Missouri. The agency amended the RFQ six times, and quotations were due by October 18, 2018. Contracting Officer's Statement (COS)/Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 4; RFQ at 1. The solicitation provided for the issuance of a fixed-price task order to the vendor whose quotation represented the best value to the agency, considering the following evaluation factors of equal importance: technical/management approach and price. RFQ at 3-4. The period of performance consisted of a 1-year base period and three 1-year option periods. Id. at 2. As relevant to this protest, within the technical/ management approach factor, there were four subfactors of equal importance: Subfactor 1 - Technical: [C]onfigure and maintain a Gigabit Passive Optical Network (GPON) infrastructure and the design, installation, configuration and administration of this technology within the Department of Defense (DoD) . . . . Subfactor 2 - Technical: [C]onfigure and maintain a virtualized server environment and provide server virtualization design, installation, configuration, and administration within the DoD . . . . Subfactor 3 - Technical: [P]rovide network design, installation, configuration, and administration within the DoD . . . . Subfactor 4 - Management and Staffing Approach: [O]fferor's mix of labor categories and labor hours as well as the management approach for meeting all requirements of the [performance work statement]. Specifically, the management approach shall outline how fully-trained personnel are provided/retained . . . . In addition to the technical quote, the breakouts in the pricing worksheet will be used to evaluate labor categories/labor hours. . . . Id. at 4 (internal performance work statement citations omitted). Quotations would be assigned one of five adjectival ratings for each subfactor, ranging from unacceptable to outstanding. Agency Report (AR), Tab 5, RFQ Attach.