Cyberdata Technologies, LLC

B-417816 Nov 05, 2019 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights CyberData Technologies, LLC, of Herndon, Virginia, protests its exclusion from the competitive range by the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), under request for proposals (RFP) No. ST-1330-18-RP-0041 for professional and engineering services in support of the National Weather Service (NWS). CyberData challenges the agency's evaluation of its proposal under various price and non-price factors. 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:  Cyberdata Technologies, LLC File:  B-417816 Date:  November 5, 2019 Edward J. Tolchin, Esq., and Andrés M. Vera, Esq., Offit Kurman Attorneys At Law, for the protester. John L. Guinan, Jr., Esq., Department of Commerce, for the agency. Robert T. Wu, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that the agency improperly excluded the protester from the competitive range is denied where the record shows that the agency’s decision is reasonable and in accordance with the stated evaluation criteria. DECISION CyberData Technologies, LLC, of Herndon, Virginia, protests its exclusion from the competitive range by the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), under request for proposals (RFP) No. ST-1330-18-RP-0041 for professional and engineering services in support of the National Weather Service (NWS).  CyberData challenges the agency’s evaluation of its proposal under various price and non-price factors. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP, issued on August 6, 2018, sought proposals for a multiple-award, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) professional and technical services contract to support the agency’s weather domain.[1]  RFP at 7.  The resulting contracts were to consist of a 2-year base period and three 1-year option periods.  Id.  The RFP explains that the professional and technical services solution, or ProTech, “is a suite of multiple-award [IDIQ] contracts consisting of five Domains:  Satellite, Ocean, Fisheries, Weather, and Enterprise Operations.”  Id.  According to the RFP, each Domain has its own multiple-award IDIQ contracts; this solicitation seeks to procure services in support of the Weather Domain.  Id.  The agency refers to this acquisition as ProTech-Weather.  Id. The ProTech-Weather multiple-award contracts are intended to support “the full range of related requirements for weather, water and climate activities, including but not limited to developing, collecting, and analyzing decision-support data, executing operations and maintenance functions for non-IT [information technology] mission critical systems. . . and corporate administration and financial management.”  Id. at 12.  The statement of work (SOW) includes three support activities:  scientific services; program and project management, consulting, and training; and engineering services for systems and facilities.  Id. at 12-17.  Each of these activities includes various services that could be performed under the resulting contract.  Id. According to the RFP, award was to be made neither on a lowest-price, technically-acceptable nor a tradeoff basis.  Id. at 74.  Instead, the RFP states that “the best value basis will be determined by the Highest Technically Rated Offerors with a Fair and Reasonable Price” under part 15 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).  Id.  Determination of the highest technically rated offerors was to be based on the evaluation of three non-price factors, listed in descending order of importance:  corporate experience and commitment (corporate experience); management approach; and past performance.  Id.  The non-price factors, when combined, were to be significantly more important than price, and were to “play a dominant role in the basis for award.”  Id.  However, an offeror whose proposed price was not found to be fair and reasonable “will not be awarded a contract regardless of the Government’s evaluation of the non-price factors of the Offeror’s proposal.”  Id. The agency received 31 offers in response to the solicitation, including one from CyberData.  AR, Tab 13, Competitive Range Determination, at 1-2.  An initial evaluation of the protester’s proposal resulted in marginal ratings under the corporate experience and management approach factors, a very good rating for past performance, and a determination that the firm’s proposed price was reasonable.[2]  Id. at 3.  The agency found that 22 offerors “presented strong enough technical experience and capability to be considered the most highly rated.”  Id.