ENGlobal Government Services, Inc. (SP4702-20-R-0014)

B-419612.3 Dec 15, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights ENGlobal Government Services, Inc. (EGS), of Tulsa, Oklahoma, protests the award of a contract to Kellogg, Brown & Root Services, Inc. (KBR), of Houston, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. SP4702-20-R-0014, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for maintenance of automated fuel handling equipment. The protester challenges various aspects of the agency's evaluation and source selection decision. The protester also contends that the agency engaged in unequal discussions. 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:  ENGlobal Government Services, Inc. File:  B-419612.3 Date:  December 15, 2021 Alexander J. Brittin, Esq., Brittin Law Group, PLLC; and Mary Pat Buckenmeyer, Esq., Dunlap Bennet & Ludwig PLLC, for the protester. Seth H. Locke, Esq., Julia M. Fox, Esq., and Paul M. Korol, Esq., Perkins Coie LLP, for Kellogg, Brown & Root Services, Inc., the intervenor. Rachel M. Noble, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency, for the agency. April Y. Shields, Esq., and Christina Sklarew, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1.  Protest challenging various aspects of the agency’s evaluation and award decision is dismissed where the arguments are either an untimely request for reconsideration of a prior decision or an untimely challenge to the scope of the agency’s corrective action taken in response to another protest. 2.  Protest arguing that the agency improperly engaged in discussions with the awardee is denied where, while the record shows that the agency did engage in discussions with only the awardee, the protester fails to demonstrate competitive prejudice. 3.  Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of the awardee’s professional compensation plan is denied where the record demonstrates that the agency’s evaluation was reasonable, consistent with the solicitation, and in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation provision 52.222-46. DECISION ENGlobal Government Services, Inc. (EGS), of Tulsa, Oklahoma, protests the award of a contract to Kellogg, Brown & Root Services, Inc. (KBR),[1] of Houston, Texas, under request for proposals (RFP) No. SP4702-20-R-0014, issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for maintenance of automated fuel handling equipment.  The protester challenges various aspects of the agency’s evaluation and source selection decision.  The protester also contends that the agency engaged in unequal discussions. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND This protest follows EGS’s prior protests of the same procurement:  the first protests were denied by our Office on May 14, 2021, and the second protest was dismissed by the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) on July 15, 2021.  By way of background, on June 17, 2020, the agency issued the RFP pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12, acquisition of commercial items, and part 15, contracting by negotiation.  AR, Tab 1, RFP.[2]  The RFP sought a contractor to support the maintenance and sustainment of all automated fuel handling equipment (AFHE) sites worldwide.  The RFP explains that the AFHE system is an industrial control system with “real-time data acquisition/control and inventory management,” and its “primary purpose is to automate both transfer and inventory functions in order to reduce the risk of spills and leakage of petroleum.”  AR, Tab 2, RFP Performance Work Statement (PWS) at 1.  The contractor would be required to provide all personnel, equipment, materials, a maintenance program manager, and necessary services, and be able to respond to multiple requests simultaneously and work at multiple locations worldwide.  Id. The RFP contemplated the award of a single, fixed-price, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract.  AR, Tab 6, RFP § M at 2.  The contract would be performed over five years with a guaranteed minimum amount of $100,000 and a maximum amount of $49,500,000.  RFP at 3; RFP PWS at 1. The RFP provided for award on a best-value tradeoff basis considering five evaluation factors:  technical approach; maintenance program management approach/personnel qualifications (“management approach”); past performance; cybersecurity; and price.  RFP § M at 1-2.  The RFP provided that the technical approach factor was “significantly more important” than the other non-price factors; that all of the non-price factors, when combined, were “significantly more important” than price; and that, “[a]s the non-price ratings become more equal among proposals, the evaluated price becomes more important.”  Id.