OBXtek, Inc.

B-417880,B-417880.2,B-417881 Nov 25, 2019 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights OBXtek, Inc., a small business of Tysons Corner, Virginia, challenges the issuance of two task orders to Amyx, Inc., a small business of Reston, Virginia, under request for proposal (RFP) Nos. HT005019R0001 and HT005019R0002 issued by the Defense Health Agency under the General Services Administration's (GSA) One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS) multiple-award, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract for contracting and program management support services and acquisition support services, respectively. The protester primarily alleges that the agency unreasonably rejected its proposals for failing to adequately justify its low proposed labor rates. We deny the protests. 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:  OBXtek, Inc. File:  B-417880; B-417880.2; B-417881 Date:  November 25, 2019 Aron C. Beezley, Esq., Sarah Osborne, Esq., Lisa Markman, Esq., and Patrick R. Quigley, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for the protester.  James Y. Boland, Esq., Christina Wood, Esq., and Michael Francel, Esq., Venable LLP, for Amyx, Inc., the intervenor. Ian F. Rothfuss, Esq., and John G. Terra, Esq., Defense Health Agency, for the agency. Michael Willems, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s rejection of the protester’s proposals as unacceptable is denied where the solicitations provided that offerors proposing compensation inadequate to attract and retain qualified personnel would be ineligible for award, and the agency reasonably concluded that the protester’s proposed compensation was inadequate. DECISION OBXtek, Inc., a small business of Tysons Corner, Virginia, challenges the issuance of two task orders to Amyx, Inc., a small business of Reston, Virginia, under request for proposal (RFP) Nos. HT005019R0001 and HT005019R0002 issued by the Defense Health Agency under the General Services Administration’s (GSA) One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS) multiple-award, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract for contracting and program management support services and acquisition support services, respectively.  The protester primarily alleges that the agency unreasonably rejected its proposals for failing to adequately justify its low proposed labor rates. We deny the protests. BACKGROUND The agency issued both RFPs in March of 2019 each contemplating a single award on a primarily fixed-price basis.[1]  Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 2; see also Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, Contract Support RFP, at 32-42.  The RFPs provided that proposals would be evaluated on the basis of three criteria:  (1) technical; (2) past performance; and (3) price.  AR, Tab 1, Contract Support RFP, at 99-100; AR, Tab 24, Acquisition Support RFP at 57-58.  Of note, the RFPs established that the technical evaluation factor would be evaluated on a pass/fail basis.  Id.  The RFPs also indicated that award would be made on the basis of a tradeoff between past performance and price, with past performance being more important than price.  Id.  Relevant to this protest, the RFPs contemplated that the successful contractor would provide services in several different geographical areas.  MOL at 2.  Specifically, both contracts contemplated significant numbers of staff performing services in the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Area; Aurora, Colorado, and San Antonio, Texas.[2]  Id. Related to this requirement, the solicitations included a “Labor Category Minimum Compensation Matrix” that provided hourly rates broken down by relevant labor category.  AR, Tab 1, Contract Support RFP, at 96; AR, Tab 24, Acquisition Support RFP at 54.  Offerors proposing an hourly rate for a given labor category or location that was below the rate identified in the minimum compensation matrix were required to provide a “justification showing evidence of why proposed compensation to workers is adequate to obtain and retain qualified workers.”  Id.  Further, the solicitations indicated that such justifications would be evaluated to determine whether the proposed compensation is adequate to obtain and retain qualified workers, and if the justifications were found to be inadequate, the offeror would be ineligible for award.  AR, Tab 1, Contract Support RFP, at 101; AR, Tab 24, Acquisition Support RFP at 58-59. The agency received several offers in response to the RFPs, including those from OBXtek and Amyx.  MOL at 5.  Of note, OBXtek’s offers included labor rates below the minimum rates for most labor categories, while Amyx proposed labor rates that met or exceeded those minimum rates.  Id.