TEN21 Capital, LLC (VA255-18-R-0517)

B-418906.4 Jun 23, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights TEN21 Capital, LLC, of Creve Coeur, Missouri, asks that we reconsider our January 22, 2021 decision in TEN21 Capital, B-418906.2 (unpublished decision), in which we dismissed TEN21's protest of the award of a contract to Highlands Development, LLC, of Kansas City, Kansas, under solicitation No. VA255-18-R-0517, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for a lease of clinic space located in St. Charles County, Missouri. We deny the request for reconsideration. View Decision Decision Matter of:  TEN21 Capital, LLC--Reconsideration File:  B-418906.4 Date:  June 23, 2021 Roger Denny, Esq., Spencer Fane LLP, for the protester. Natica Chapman Neely, Esq., Department of Veterans Affairs, for the agency. Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Request for reconsideration of prior decision dismissing as academic a protest of the agency’s evaluation of proposals and award of a lease is denied where the agency agreed to reevaluate the lease proposals, make a new selection decision, and terminate the prior lease award, if appropriate, and where the requester has not shown that the prior decision to dismiss the pending protest contains errors of fact or law that warrant reversal or modification of the decision. DECISION   TEN21 Capital, LLC, of Creve Coeur, Missouri, asks that we reconsider our January 22, 2021 decision in TEN21 Capital, B-418906.2 (unpublished decision), in which we dismissed TEN21’s protest of the award of a contract to Highlands Development, LLC, of Kansas City, Kansas, under solicitation No. VA255-18-R-0517, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for a lease of clinic space located in St. Charles County, Missouri.  We deny the request for reconsideration. In its protest, TEN21 challenged the VA’s decision not to set aside the procurement for service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) concerns; the agency’s evaluation of proposals; and its delay in providing the protester with notice that its offer was unsuccessful.[1]  Prior to the due date for submitting the agency’s report, the VA advised our Office that it would reevaluate proposals and make a new award decision, and that it would terminate the previously awarded lease if the reevaluation resulted in a different award decision.  Request for Recon., exh. 1, Notice of Corrective Action, at 2.  The agency asserted that the proposed corrective action rendered the protest academic, and asked that it be dismissed on that basis.  The protester objected to the request for dismissal, arguing that the corrective action was not reasonably tailored to address all the procurement errors alleged in the protest and that, in the absence of a detailed corrective action plan to which TEN21 claimed it was “entitled,” the protest was not dismissible.  We concluded that the actions proposed by the agency rendered the protest academic, and dismissed that protest.[2] In its request for reconsideration, TEN21 argues that our dismissal of its protest as academic was based on legal error.  In addition to repeating arguments it raised in opposing the agency’s request for dismissal, TEN21 argues that the agency’s corrective action notice was too “vague and noncommittal” to meet “the demanding standard the GAO established under Mythics,” citing our decision in Mythics, Inc.; Oracle America, Inc., B-418785; B-418785.2, Sept. 9, 2020 CPD ¶ 295. Under our Bid Protest Regulations, to obtain reconsideration the requesting party must show that our prior decision contains either errors of fact or law, or present information not previously considered that warrants reversal or modification of our decision.  4 C.F.R.