All Points Logistics, Inc. (47QFCA20R0018)

B-418700 Jul 31, 2020 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights MicroTechnologies, LLC (MicroTech), a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) of Vienna, Virginia, protests its elimination from the competition conducted by the General Services Administration (GSA), under task order request (TOR) No. 47QFCA20R0018, for planning modernization, operation, and maintenance of information technology (IT) systems and services supporting U.S. Army Pacific Command and its subordinate commands and partners. The protester contends that the agency's decision to eliminate MicroTech from the competition was unreasonable. 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 version, with no redactions, has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of:  MicroTechnologies, LLC File:  B-418700 Date:  July 31, 2020 Aron C. Beezley, Esq., Patrick R. Quigley, Esq., Sarah S. Osborne, Esq., Lisa A. Markman, Esq., and Nathaniel J. Greeson, Esq., Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, for the protester. Kelli Cochran-Seabrook, Esq., General Services Administration, for the agency. Michael P. Grogan, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency was required to seek clarification before rejecting the protester’s proposal as unacceptable is denied where the agency reasonably concluded that the protester’s proposal was unacceptable and was under no obligation to seek clarification regarding the protester’s failure to submit required information. DECISION   MicroTechnologies, LLC (MicroTech), a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) of Vienna, Virginia, protests its elimination from the competition conducted by the General Services Administration (GSA), under task order request (TOR) No. 47QFCA20R0018, for planning modernization, operation, and maintenance of information technology (IT) systems and services supporting U.S. Army Pacific Command and its subordinate commands and partners.  The protester contends that the agency’s decision to eliminate MicroTech from the competition was unreasonable. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The agency issued the solicitation on March 9, 2020, pursuant to the procedures in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 16.5, to SDVOSB firms holding GSA Veterans Technology Services 2 (VETS 2) indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity governmentwide acquisition contracts.  Agency Report (AR), Tab 1, Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS), at 1-2.  The TOR contemplated the issuance of a cost-plus-award-fee task order, with a 1-year base period of performance and four 1-year option periods.  AR, Tab 2, TOR at 2.  The solicitation sought contractor support for planning modernization, operation, and maintenance of command, control, communications, and computers (C4) and IT systems and services.  Id. at 33.  Specifically, the task order sought contractor support for services including site surveys, engineering, design, procurement, logistics, implementation, operation and maintenance, knowledge management, cybersecurity, and training for new and existing C4 and IT systems.  Id.  at 10. The solicitation advised that award would be made to the offeror whose proposal was most advantageous to the government, considering cost and other factors.[1]  TOR at 89.  In addition to cost, the TOR included the following evaluation factors:  technical approach; management approach/key personnel/project staffing; and corporate experience.  Id. at 91.  In addition, the solicitation required offerors to meet specific pass/fail criteria.  Id. at 81.  The TOR stated that “[a] failure on any single Pass/Fail criteria will make the proposal ineligible for award, with no further evaluation of the technical and cost proposal conducted by the Government.”  Id. at 89. As relevant to this protest, offerors were also required to make representations in their proposals, to include representations concerning the use of certain telecommunications and video surveillance services or equipment.  See TOR at 70, 78.  In this regard, each offeror was required to affirmatively represent if it would, or would not, provide “covered telecommunications equipment or services” in accordance with FAR provision 52.204‑24.  This FAR provision implements section 889(a)(1)(A) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, which prohibits agencies from procuring covered telecommunications equipment or services from designated Chinese entities and/or affiliates.[2]  If an offeror answered in the affirmative, it was required to provide additional information to the agency.[3]  Id.