Coast to Coast Computer Products, Inc. (SP7000-21-R-1001)

B-419624.2 Jun 28, 2021 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Coast to Coast Computer Products, Inc. (CTC), of Simi Valley, California, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. SP7000-21-R-1001, which was issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for the lease of multifunction devices (MFDs). The protester contends that the solicitation improperly provides for award of contracts on a lowest-price, technically acceptable (LPTA) basis. We deny the protest. View Decision Decision Matter of:  Coast to Coast Computer Products, Inc. File:  B-419624.2 Date:  June 28, 2021 Rick Vogel, for the protester. Marissa M. Jackson, Esq., and Bruce T. McCarty, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency, for the agency. Jonathan L. Kang, Esq., and John Sorrenti, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest that a solicitation improperly provides for award on a lowest-price, technically acceptable (LPTA) basis is denied where the agency issued a determination that reasonably found that the statutory and regulatory requirements for use of LPTA award criteria were satisfied. DECISION Coast to Coast Computer Products, Inc. (CTC), of Simi Valley, California, protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. SP7000-21-R-1001, which was issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) for the lease of multifunction devices (MFDs).  The protester contends that the solicitation improperly provides for award of contracts on a lowest-price, technically acceptable (LPTA) basis. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND DLA issued the RFP on January 4, 2021, seeking proposals for the award of multiple indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts for the lease of A3, A4, and production-level MFDs, accessories, and document devices, as well as related supplies and services.[1]  Protest, exh. 5, RFP at 1.[2]  The requirements include leasing MFDs, “installation and removal, full-service maintenance, all consumable supplies (excluding paper), end-user training, reports, relocations, network functionality, and network security.”  Id.  The IDIQ contracts will each have an ordering period of 5 years, and the maximum ordering value for all contracts will be $702,153,470.  Id. at 1-2. The RFP advises that proposals will be evaluated based on the following factors:  (1) technical, (2) past performance, and (3) price.  Id. at 6.  The technical and past performance factors will be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis.  Id. at 6-7.  As relevant here, an offeror’s technical proposal “must demonstrate it meets the minimum specification requirements of each device as well as any information technology (IT) and security requirements set forth in the attached [performance work statement (PWS)].”  Id. at 6.  The solicitation provides for awards of contracts on an LPTA basis to the responsible offerors whose proposals are rated acceptable under the technical and past performance factors, and offer the “lowest price to the government.”  Id. On February 15, prior to the solicitation’s February 18 closing date, CTC filed an agency-level protest challenging the RFP’s LPTA award criteria.  Protest, exh. 8, Agency-Level Protest at 1.  The protester argued that the RFP violated Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) section 215.101-2-70 which, as discussed below, sets forth the limitations on the use of LPTA award criteria in solicitations issued by the Department of Defense.  The contracting officer denied the protest on February 17, concluding that the RFP satisfied the requirements of the DFARS section.  Protest, exh. 9, Agency-Level Protest Decision at 1.  On February 25, CTC filed a protest with our Office challenging the RFP’s LPTA award criteria.  Protest (B-419624) at 1.  On March 10, prior to filing an agency report, DLA advised our Office that it would take corrective action in response to the protest.  Coast to Coast Computer Prods., Inc., B-419624, Mar. 12, 2021, at 1 (unpublished decision).  The agency stated that it would “conduct a new evaluation pursuant to DFARS 215.101‑2-70” to determine whether to use LPTA award criteria for the solicitation.  Id.  Based on the proposed corrective action, we concluded that the protest was rendered academic and dismissed the protest.  Id. On March 22, DLA posted a notice on the System for Award Management (SAM) website advising that it would proceed with the LPTA award criteria for the RFP.  Agency Report (AR), Tab A, SAM.gov Notice at 1.  The notice included a memorandum from the contracting officer approving the use of LPTA award criteria, which was issued pursuant to the requirements of DFARS section 215.101-2-70.  Id.;Protest, exh.