AT&T Mobility, LLC (70US0921R70090027)

B-420494 May 10, 2022 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights AT&T Mobility LLC (AT&T), of Columbia, Maryland, protests the issuance of a federal supply schedule (FSS) order to Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless (Verizon), of Annapolis Junction, Maryland, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 70US0921R70090027, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, United States Secret Service for cellular communications services and equipment. AT&T challenges the agency's evaluation of proposals under the non-price and price factors, and the resulting best-value tradeoff source selection decision. We sustain 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: AT&T Mobility LLC File: B-420494 Date: May 10, 2022 Jonathan M. Baker, Esq., Cherie J. Owen, Esq., James G. Peyster, Esq., Tyler S. Brown, Esq., and Issac D. Schabes, Esq., Crowell & Moring LLP, for the protester. Kayleigh M. Scalzo, Esq., Andrew R. Guy, Esq., Anna M. Menzel, Esq., and Jennifer K. Bentley, Esq., Covington & Burling LLP, for Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless, the intervenor. Michael Noyes, Esq., and Nicole S. Hutchinson, Esq., Department of Homeland Security, for the agency. Heather Self, Esq., and Peter H. Tran, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s evaluation of proposals under the non-price and price factors and alleging the evaluation approach converted a best-value tradeoff procurement into a lowest-priced, technically acceptable competition is sustained because the record shows the agency evaluated in a manner inconsistent with the solicitation and failed to qualitatively compare proposals. DECISION AT&T Mobility LLC (AT&T), of Columbia, Maryland, protests the issuance of a federal supply schedule (FSS) order to Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless (Verizon), of Annapolis Junction, Maryland, under request for proposals (RFP) No. 70US0921R70090027, issued by the Department of Homeland Security, United States Secret Service for cellular communications services and equipment. AT&T challenges the agency’s evaluation of proposals under the non-price and price factors, and the resulting best‑value tradeoff source selection decision. We sustain the protest. BACKGROUND On March 19, 2021, using the procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4, the agency issued the solicitation to FSS contract holders.[1] Agency Report (AR), Exh. 15, RFP at 792, 798.[2] The solicitation sought proposals for an: all-inclusive cellular communications services and equipment contract that guarantees reliable services and devices. The intent is for the [agency] to receive all necessary equipment, services, infrastructure, emergency support and Radio Frequency (RF) engineering or survey support, surcharges as well as any additional labor or roaming costs all at one pre‑determined cost. Id. at 851. The agency’s goal with the procurement is to ensure that it “has global cellular services and equipment available for any special event, day to day usage, in‑building office, National Security, Global Travel, and special interest domicile coverage and/or support,” inclusive of devices and accessories. Id. The solicitation contemplated issuance of a single, hybrid fixed-price and time-and-materials order for a 1-year base period, which included a 6-month transition, and four 1-year option periods. Id. at 792, 798, 803. The solicitation also required offerors to provide pricing for several optional contract line item numbers (CLINs). Id. at 794-797. As initially issued, the solicitation established that award would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis considering price and the following non-price factors: (1) technical; (2) pass/fail matrix for 111 core requirements from the statement of work (SOW); (3) transition; and (4) corporate experience. Initial RFP at 366-367. The agency later revised the solicitation to remove the pass/fail matrix evaluation factor, to fold consideration of an offeror’s ability to meet the SOW’s now 112 core requirements into the evaluation under the technical factor, and to add weights to the non-price evaluation factors. RFP Amend. 5 at 448, 504-506, 549. These revisions continued to be reflected in the final version of the solicitation, which established that the source selection would be made on a best-value tradeoff basis considering price and the following weighted non‑price factors: (1) technical (40 percent); (2) transition (40 percent); and (3) corporate experience (20 percent), which included the key personnel experience element. RFP at 840‑841.