Qwest Government Services, Inc. d/b/a CenturyLink QGS (70QS0120R00001013)

B-419597,B-419597.2 May 24, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Qwest Government Services, Inc. d/b/a CenturyLink QGS (CenturyLink) protests the issuance of a task order to Verizon Business Network Services LLC, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 70S0120R00001013, issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for Federal Network Protection System services in support of DHS's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. CenturyLink asserts that the agency improperly found Verizon's proposal eligible for award, notwithstanding the proposal's failure to meet a material solicitation requirement. The protester also argues that the agency's evaluation of technical proposals was unreasonable; that the agency failed to amend the RFP to reflect DHS's actual requirement; and that the best-value tradeoff analysis was flawed. 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:  Qwest Government Services, Inc. d/b/a CenturyLink QGS File:  B-419597; B-419597.2 Date:  May 24, 2021 Shelly L. Ewald, Esq., and Zahra S. Abrams, Esq., Watt Tieder Hoffar & Fitzgerald, LLP, for the protester. Kayleigh Scalzo, Esq., Jason A. Carey, Esq., Evan Sherwood, Esq., Brooke Stanley, Esq., and Anna Menzel, Esq., Covington & Burling, LLP, for Verizon Business Network Services LLC, the intervenor. Christian M. Butler, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, for the agency. Kenneth Kilgour, Esq., and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest that the agency found the awardee’s proposal eligible for award, notwithstanding the proposal’s failure to meet a material solicitation requirement, is denied where the record demonstrates that the allegation is based on an unreasonable interpretation of the solicitation’s requirements. 2.  Challenge to the reasonableness of the agency’s evaluation of the protester’s technical proposal is denied where the record demonstrates the evaluation was reasonable and consistent with the solicitation’s requirements. 3.  Protest that the agency failed to amend the solicitation to reflect the agency’s actual needs is denied where the record demonstrates that the solicitation accurately reflected the agency’s requirement. 4.  Protest that the agency’s best-value tradeoff analysis was unreasonable is denied where the record shows that the analysis was in accordance with stated evaluation criteria and considered all of the advantages and disadvantages associated with the proposals. DECISION   Qwest Government Services, Inc. d/b/a CenturyLink QGS (CenturyLink) protests the issuance of a task order to Verizon Business Network Services LLC, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 70S0120R00001013, issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for Federal Network Protection System services in support of DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.  CenturyLink asserts that the agency improperly found Verizon’s proposal eligible for award, notwithstanding the proposal’s failure to meet a material solicitation requirement. The protester also argues that the agency’s evaluation of technical proposals was unreasonable; that the agency failed to amend the RFP to reflect DHS’s actual requirement; and that the best-value tradeoff analysis was flawed.  We deny the protest. BACKGROUND This procurement was conducted under the General Services Administration Enterprise Infrastructure Solutions governmentwide acquisition contract. The procurement was conducted in two phases; this protest concerns phase 2.[1] The RFP contemplated the issuance of a single task order to the firm whose proposal represented the best value to the government, considering two non-price factors--technical capability and past performance--and price.  Agency Report (AR), Tab B1g, RFP amend. 0007 (Conformed RFP) (RFP) at 137, 139.  The technical capability factor had the following four subfactors, listed in descending order of importance:  service availability, scaling approach, technical approach, and project manager.  Id. at 139.  The technical capability factor was slightly more important than the past performance factor; when combined, the two non-price factors were significantly more important than price.  RFP at 139.  The RFP advised offerors that, “[a]s elements of the non-cost factors become closer in quality, price increases in relative importance.”  Id.