Defense Solutions Group, LLC (832017100)

B-420353 Feb 15, 2022 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Defense Solutions Group, LLC (DSG), a small business located in Virginia Beach, Virginia, protests the exclusion of its proposal for the award of a task order from the competition by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), under request for proposals (RFP) No. 832017100, to obtain information technology (IT) support services. The protester asserts that the agency's decision to exclude its proposal from the competition for failing to comply with two solicitation administrative requirements was unreasonable. We dismiss the protest. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Defense Solutions Group, LLC File: B-420353 Date: February 15, 2022 J. Bradley Reaves, Esq., and Beth V. McMahon, Esq., ReavesColey, PLLC, for the protester. Joseph A. Buitron, Esq., and Michelle L. Sabin, Esq., Defense Information Systems Agency, for the agency. Paula A. Williams, Esq., and Edward Goldstein, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging agency’s exclusion of protester’s proposal from competition is dismissed where the protester failed to follow solicitation instructions to submit all administrative requirements in required format, the solicitation clearly advised offerors that failure to follow the instructions would result in elimination, and the protester did not challenge the clearly stated ground rules before the closing date set for receipt of proposals. DECISION Defense Solutions Group, LLC (DSG), a small business located in Virginia Beach, Virginia, protests the exclusion of its proposal for the award of a task order from the competition by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), under request for proposals (RFP) No. 832017100, to obtain information technology (IT) support services. The protester asserts that the agency’s decision to exclude its proposal from the competition for failing to comply with two solicitation administrative requirements was unreasonable. We dismiss the protest. BACKGROUND On June 22, 2021, the agency issued the RFP, as a small business set-aside, to firms holding Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) ENCORE III multiple-award, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts, pursuant to the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 16.5.[1] RFP amend. 13[2] at 2. The solicitation contemplated the issuance of a hybrid fixed-price, cost-reimbursement task order for services in support of DISA’s Services Directorate requirement for Sustainment Support East Computing Ecosystem Infrastructure & Sustainment Line of Business contract. Id. The solicitation advised offerors that the task order would be issued on a best-value tradeoff basis considering technical/management approach and price factors. Id. at 5. The RFP included instructions for submission of proposals, to include instructions for what the solicitation referred to as “administrative requirements,” which were set forth under paragraph 2 (a-i) of the solicitation. Id. As relevant, one of the administrative requirements (paragraph 2(c)) dictated the format for submission of DOD form, DD Form 254.[3] The solicitation specified that: Offerors[[4]] shall complete Blocks 6 and 7 of the DD Form 254 (Attachment 3) with the appropriate information for their companies. The DD Form 254(s) shall be submitted in the original Government-provided, Attachment 3, PDF [portable document format] form. A separate DD Form 254 shall be submitted for each proposed subcontractor (when applicable). Completed DD Forms 254 shall be submitted with proposals. Id. at 3 (emphasis added). DISA received a number of questions regarding the solicitation requirements. As part of the questions and answers (Q&A) incorporated in the RFP, the agency clarified the solicitation’s administrative requirements, as follows: Q: Should we include the following as attachments within the technical proposal or as stand alone document to be submitted with the proposal: OCCI [organizational and consultant conflicts of interest] mitigation plans, DD254(s), SCRM [supply chain risk management] plans, GFP [government furnished property] Attachment, FAR/DFARS [Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement] Provisions/Clauses attachment, and Section 508[[5]] compliance. A: These documents should be provided as stand alone documents. Agency Report (AR) exh. 1i, RFP amend. 12, Q&A No. 28. In explaining how the agency would evaluate proposals, the RFP stated that the agency first would review proposals for compliance with the solicitation’s administrative requirements.