ICI Services Corporation (N00164-19-R-3502)

B-418255.5,B-418255.6 Oct 13, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights ICI Services Corporation, of Virginia Beach, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Serco, Inc., of Herndon, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. N00164-19-R-3502, issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command, for professional support services on behalf of the Navy's Program Manager, Ships (PMS) 317 program office. ICI contends the agency's evaluation of task order proposals and resulting award decision were improper. 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:  ICI Services Corporation File:  B-418255.5; B-418255.6 Date:  October 13, 2021 Shomari B. Wade, Esq., Michael J. Gardner, Esq., Brett A. Castellat, Esq., and Christopher M. O’Brien, Esq, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, for the protester. Daniel R. Forman, Esq., James G. Peyster, Esq., and Zachary H. Schroeder, Esq., Crowell & Moring LLP, for Serco, Inc., an intervenor. Samantha Hogue, Esq., and Sabrina Hay, Esq., Department of the Navy, for the agency. Louis A. Chiarella, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s eligibility is denied where the record demonstrates that the agency reasonably determined the awardee to be the proper successor-in-interest to the entity which submitted the initial proposal. 2.  Protest challenging the adjectival evaluation rating assigned to protester’s technical proposal is denied for lack of competitive prejudice where the record demonstrates the agency’s determination that the awardee was technically superior to the protester was not based on the offerors’ assigned ratings but on the underlying evaluation findings. 3.  Protest challenging the agency’s cost realism evaluation of protester’s proposal is denied where protester fails to show that it was competitively prejudiced by the action it challenges. 4.  Protest that the agency failed to give adequate consideration to the awardee’s potential organizational conflict of interest is dismissed where the protester fails to demonstrate any hard facts reflecting a conflict. 5.  Protest challenging the agency’s best-value tradeoff decision is denied where the record reflects the agency’s rationale was reasonable, wholly consistent with the stated evaluation criteria, and thoroughly documented. DECISION ICI Services Corporation, of Virginia Beach, Virginia, protests the issuance of a task order to Serco, Inc., of Herndon, Virginia, under request for proposals (RFP) No. N00164-19-R-3502, issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command, for professional support services on behalf of the Navy’s Program Manager, Ships (PMS) 317 program office.  ICI contends the agency’s evaluation of task order proposals and resulting award decision were improper. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The mission of PMS 317 is to design, build, outfit, and test Landing Platform Docking (LPD-17) amphibious ships and to provide for their maintenance support.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, RFP at 8.  With 11 LPD-17 ships delivered, 2 ships in construction, and the planned future procurement of 13 additional LPD-17 ships, the principal PMS 317 activities include ship acquisition, technical/system integration, ship production, testing, outfitting, government-furnished equipment/government-furnished information management, and post-delivery (e.g., sustainment, configuration management).  Id. The procurement here has been a long and contentious one.  The RFP was issued on April 26, 2019, to holders of the Navy’s SeaPort Next Generation (SeaPort-NxG) indefinite-delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts.[1]  In general terms, the solicitation requires the contractor to provide program management and acquisition support, engineering and technical support, test and evaluation support, production management and information technology support, and post-delivery support to the PMS 317 program office.  RFP at 8.  Further, the RFP provided offerors with the labor categories and labor hour amounts that the contractor is to provide to the PMS 317 program office.[2]  RFP at 4-6, 70, attach. J.7, Labor Category Qualifications. The RFP contemplated the issuance of a cost-plus-fixed-fee task order for a base year with four 1-year options.  RFP at 4-6, 74.  The solicitation established that award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis, considering the following four evaluation factors in descending order of importance:  (1) technical and management (technical); (2) staffing plan and personnel (staffing); (3) past performance; and (4) cost.[3]  Id.