Tactical Network Corporation (FA8217-20-R-5000)

B-418962.2 Nov 30, 2020 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Tactical Network Corporation, of Peachtree City, Georgia, a small business, protests the award of a contract to Filius Corporation, of Centreville, Virginia, also a small business, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8217-20-R-5000, issued by the Department of the Air Force for sustainment and contractor logistics support for Tactical Air Operations Module AN/TYQ-23A(V)1 and ancillary equipment at multiple Air Force facilities. The protester contends that the Air Force misevaluated its total evaluated price. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Tactical Network Corporation File:  B-418962.2 Date:  November 30, 2020 Timothy J. Antrim, Tactical Network Corporation, the protester. Alexis J. Bernstein, Esq., and Josephine R. Farinelli, Esq., Department of the Air Force, for the agency. Paul N. Wengert, Esq., and Tania Calhoun, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that agency misevaluated protester’s total evaluated price is denied where the price evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation, and protester did not show any error in the agency’s pricing calculations, but instead based its argument on its own mathematical fallacy; allegation that agency improperly changed total evaluated price calculation is denied where, even assuming the change reflected an error in logic, it was implemented equally for both the protester and awardee so the protester could not show that the change resulted in competitive prejudice.  DECISION   Tactical Network Corporation, of Peachtree City, Georgia, a small business, protests the award of a contract to Filius Corporation, of Centreville, Virginia, also a small business, under request for proposals (RFP) No. FA8217-20-R-5000, issued by the Department of the Air Force for sustainment and contractor logistics support for Tactical Air Operations Module AN/TYQ-23A(V)1 and ancillary equipment at multiple Air Force facilities.  The protester contends that the Air Force misevaluated its total evaluated price.  We deny the protest.  BACKGROUND The RFP, issued October 18, 2019, sought proposals from small businesses to provide services under an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract for a 5‑year ordering period and a 6-month option period.[1]  AR, Tab 2, Memorandum of Law (MOL) at 2.  The contract would be awarded to the offeror that submitted the lowest-priced technically acceptable proposal.  Id.  The RFP included a performance work statement (PWS) that described the scope of contractor logistics support services worldwide that would be ordered as including engineering support; project services; procurement of spares; depot supply support; and depot maintenance support for hardware/software.  AR, Tab 10, PWS, at 7; MOL at 2.  Task areas were assigned to individual contract line item numbers (CLIN), which were designated as fixed-price or cost-plus fixed fee.  AR, Tab 26, RFP, at 3-11.  For example, CLIN 1, for contractor logistics support, would be fixed-priced, while CLIN 2, for engineering services, would be cost-plus fixed fee.  Id. at 3-4.  Offerors were instructed to submit technical and cost/price proposals.  Technical acceptability would be evaluated under a mission capability factor, which had four subfactors.  AR, Tab 35, RFP amend. 2 at 54‑55 (§ M.2.1).  The cost/price evaluation would assess “price reasonableness, balance, affordability, and realism (where identified).”  Id. at 56 (§ M.2.3).  A total evaluated price (TEP) would be used to determine the lowest-priced technically acceptable offeror for award.