22nd Century Technologies, Inc. (19AQMM18Q0098)

B-417478.5 Apr 28, 2020 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights 22nd Century Technologies, Inc., of McLean, Virginia, requests that we reconsider our February 24, 2020, decision denying its protest alleging that the Department of State (DOS) unreasonably issued a task order to KCI-Acuity, LLC, of Leesburg, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 19AQMM19Q0098, for information technology (IT) support services. 22nd Century Technologies argues that our decision contained factual and legal errors with regard to our analysis of the past performance evaluation. We deny the request for reconsideration. View Decision Decision Matter of:  22nd Century Technologies, Inc.--Reconsideration File:  B-417478.5 Date:  April 28, 2020 Daniel J. Strouse, Esq., David Cohen, Esq., and John J. O’Brien, Esq.,Cordatis LLP, for the protester. Tudo N. Pham, Esq., Department of State, for the agency. Todd C. Culliton, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Request for reconsideration is denied where our decision did not contain any factual error because our Office properly reviewed whether the evaluation record was consistent with the solicitation’s terms and conditions. 2.  Request for reconsideration is denied because the request does not demonstrate that our decision contained any legal error. DECISION 22nd Century Technologies, Inc., of McLean, Virginia, requests that we reconsider our February 24, 2020, decision denying its protest alleging that the Department of State (DOS) unreasonably issued a task order to KCI-Acuity, LLC, of Leesburg, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 19AQMM19Q0098, for information technology (IT) support services.  22nd Century Technologies argues that our decision contained factual and legal errors with regard to our analysis of the past performance evaluation. We deny the request for reconsideration. On July 26, 2019, the DOS issued the solicitation to procure IT support services for the agency’s Bureau of Information Resource Management.  RFQ, Performance Work Statement (PWS), at 5-6, 9.  The competition was limited to firms that were awarded Streamlined Technology Acquisition Resources for Services (STARS) II contracts, which are multiple-award, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts awarded by the General Services Administration to participants in the Small Business Administration (SBA) 8(a) program to provide information technology services and service-based solutions.  RFQ, Submission Instructions, at 10.  The RFQ contemplated the award of a time-and-materials task order to be performed over a 1-year base period and four 1-year option periods.  Id. The RFQ advised that award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis considering the following four factors:  management and technical approach; similar experience and past performance; staffing plan and key personnel; and, cost/price.  RFQ, Evaluation Criteria and Methodology, at 3.  For the similar experience and past performance factor, vendors were instructed to submit at least three past performance contract profiles referencing performance completed by the prime contractor.  RFQ, Submission Instructions, at 5-6. On November 13, 2019, the agency made award to KCI-Acuity.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 52, Notice of Unsuccessful Vendor Letter.  The agency concluded that KCI-Acuity’s quotation represented a better value when compared to 22nd Century Technologies’ quotation because KCI-Acuity offered a more advantageous technical quotation, and because 22nd Century’s price quotation represented a high risk.  AR, Tab 51, Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD), at 27-29. On November 18, 2019, 22nd Century Technologies filed the underlying protest with our Office.  It alleged that the DOS unreasonably evaluated vendors’ quotations under the technical and price factors.  Protest at 5-38; Protester’s Comments and Supp. Protest at 2-15.  Relevant to this request for reconsideration, the protester alleged that KCI‑Acuity did not submit three past performance contract profiles for the prime contractor, and therefore KCI-Acuity’s quotation should have been rejected for failing to comply with a material solicitation requirement.  Protester’s Comments and Supp. Protest at 2; Protester’s Supp. Comments at 3-4.  Our Office denied that allegation.  We explained that KCI-Acuity is a joint venture between Kalani Consulting, Inc. and Acuity, Inc., and that KCI-Acuity submitted four past performance contract profiles for Acuity, Inc., and another four profiles for its subcontractors.  22nd Century Techs., Inc., B‑417483.3, B‑417483.4, Feb. 24, 2020, 2020 CPD ¶ 74 at 13.  We further explained that the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. § 644(q)(1)(C), and SBA regulations, 13 C.F.R.