Oracle America, Inc. ()

Case: B-418785 Agency: Protester: Oracle America, Inc. Date: 2020-09-09 Sustained
View full decision with AI analysis on ProtestIntel →
B-418785,B-418785.2 Sep 09, 2020 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Mythics, Inc., of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and Oracle America, Inc., of Reston, Virginia, protest the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. 030ADV20Q0125, issued by the Library of Congress (LOC) to acquire cloud computing services. The protesters argue that the RFP is unduly restrictive of competition for a variety of reasons. We sustain the protests. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Mythics, Inc.; Oracle America, Inc. File:  B-418785; B-418785.2 Date:  September 9, 2020 David S. Black, Esq., Gregory R. Hallmark, Esq., and Amy Fuentes, Esq., Holland & Knight LLP, for Mythics, Inc.; and Craig A. Holman, Esq., and Nathaniel E. Castellano, Esq., Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, LLP, for Oracle America, Inc., protesters. Emily Vartanian, Esq., Library of Congress, for the agency. Scott H. Riback, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protests challenging the terms of a solicitation as unduly restrictive are sustained where the terms of the solicitation are inconsistent with various regulatory requirements applicable to the agency. DECISION Mythics, Inc., of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and Oracle America, Inc., of Reston, Virginia, protest the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. 030ADV20Q0125, issued by the Library of Congress (LOC) to acquire cloud computing services.  The protesters argue that the RFP is unduly restrictive of competition for a variety of reasons. We sustain the protests. BACKGROUND The RFP contemplates the award, on a best-value tradeoff basis, of a single, fixed-price, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract to provide the LOC cloud computing products and services for a 5-year period of performance.  RFP at 4, 9, 40.[1]  The RFP identifies the name-brand products of three cloud services providers, Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud Platform and Microsoft Azure, and requires offerors to provide pricing for an enumerated list of 13 products or services available from these three firms.  RFP at 5-6, 39.  See also AR, exh. 1p, Pricing Schedule.  In addition (and as amended) the RFP provides for the possibility of offering the cloud services of firms not specifically identified in the RFP, and referred to only generically as “other” services (including marketplace services, professional services, training services, and support services).  RFP at 6, 39; see also AR, exh. 1p, Revised Price Schedule.  The RFP instructions expressly provide as follows:  “The Library anticipates making a single award to the vendor who can provide all three cloud services.  Vendors are encouraged to enter into teaming agreements if unable to provide all three cloud services.”  RFP at 38.  The RFP instructions also state that offerors are required to provide a technical narrative describing how they will meet the requirements of the solicitation’s statement of work, and explicitly encourage offerors to propose a solution that incorporates the “marketplaces” (discussed in detail below) of the three identified vendors.  RFP at 38.  The RFP does not include any specific instructions relating to proposing cloud services of “other” vendors. The RFP includes three separate provisions that comprise the statement of work.  First, the RFP document itself includes a section “C” which is captioned “Section C Statement of Work (SOW).”  RFP at 5-8.  This portion of the RFP includes an “overview/background” section that provides a list of the specific services being solicited from the named vendors (for example, section C.1.1 describes the Amazon services being solicited), as well as a list of “other” cloud service providers’ services being solicited, id. at 5-6; a statement of the scope of the contemplated services, id at 6; a list of contractor requirements (for example, a requirement to provide a dedicated master payer account) id.; a description of the information necessary to place an order against the awarded contract, id.; a definitional list of “functional categories” of work being solicited (for example, the list includes a definition of infrastructure as a service (IaaS)), id at 6-7; a list of contract performance and reporting requirements (for example, this includes reports detailing quality control of services and deliverables), id. at 8; a description of various requirements for all key personnel, id.; and, finally, certain generic information relating to the provision of government furnished property and reimbursement for travel, id. Second, the RFP includes an attachment which is an Amazon-specific statement of work detailing “migration readiness and planning” consulting and advisory services to be performed--presumably directly by Amazon or an authorized Amazon reseller--once award has been made.  AR, exh.

Full decision text continues on ProtestIntel...