2TechJV, LLC (1605TA-22-Q-00044)

B-420960.7 Aug 27, 2024 Jump To FULL REPORT VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights 2TechJV, LLC, of Woodbridge, Virginia, requests that we recommend the Department of Labor (DOL) reimburse the firm its reasonable costs of pursuing its protest of the issuance of a task order to Addx Corporation, of Alexandria, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) No. 1605TA-22-Q-00044. DOL issued the RFQ for services that support the operations and maintenance of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) information system (OIS). The protester argued that the agency's conduct of discussions was misleading, that the agency's evaluation of technical quotations was unreasonable, and that the agency's best-value tradeoff analysis was flawed. We grant the request in part and deny it in part. View Decision Decision Matter of: 2TechJV, LLC--Costs File: B-420960.7 Date: August 27, 2024 Samuel S. Finnerty, Esq., Katherine B. Burrows, Esq., and Patrick T. Rothwell, Esq., Piliero Mazza PLLC, for the protester. Jose Otero, Esq., Virginia K. Ackerman, Esq., Christopher L. Sanders, Esq., and Joshua L. Caplan, Esq., Department of Labor, 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 Request that GAO recommend reimbursement of protest costs is granted in part where the agency unduly delayed taking corrective action in response to clearly meritorious protest arguments, and denied in part where other protest grounds were not clearly meritorious or where the agency took prompt corrective action. DECISION 2TechJV, LLC, of Woodbridge, Virginia, requests that we recommend the Department of Labor (DOL) reimburse the firm its reasonable costs of pursuing its protest of the issuance of a task order to Addx Corporation, of Alexandria, Virginia, under request for quotations (RFQ) [1] No. 1605TA-22-Q-00044. DOL issued the RFQ for services that support the operations and maintenance of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) information system (OIS). The protester argued that the agency’s conduct of discussions was misleading, that the agency’s evaluation of technical quotations was unreasonable, and that the agency’s best-value tradeoff analysis was flawed. We grant the request in part and deny it in part. BACKGROUND The RFQ, set aside for service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, was issued in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4 to holders of a General Services Administration multiple award schedule contract, special item number 54151S--Information Technology Professional Services. Agency Report (AR), Tab 1a, Initial RFQ at 2. The contract will provide services that support OIS in three areas: the operations/helpdesk; maintenance; and development, modernization, and enhancement (DME). AR, Tab 5, RFQ amend. 0004, performance work statement (PWS) at 3. Those services are outlined and defined in the PWS. Id. The RFQ contemplated the award of a single hybrid task order with a fixed-price contract line item number (CLIN) for operations support and helpdesk and time-and-materials CLINs for maintenance and DME. AR, Tab 1a, Initial RFQ at 10. The task order period of performance would be for a base year with four 1-year options. AR, Tab 5, RFQ amend. 0004 at 8. The task order would be issued to the vendor whose quotation represented the best value to the agency, considering three factors: technical approach, past performance, and price. Id. at 86. The technical approach factor was significantly more important than the past performance factor; those non-price factors, when combined, were significantly more important than price. Id. The technical approach factor contained four equally important sub-factors that, as noted below, were subsequently revised. AR, Tab 1a, Initial RFQ at 86.; AR, Tab 5, RFQ, amend. 0004 at 77. The agency would assign the subfactors and the factor overall a rating of outstanding, good, acceptable, marginal, or unacceptable. AR, Tab 11, Source Selection Decision (SSD) at 5. Only quotations evaluated as at least acceptable under the technical approach factor and its four subfactors would be eligible for award. AR, Tab 1a, Initial RFQ at10 at 84. The agency received four quotations, including those from 2TechJV and Addx. Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at ¶ 11. After engaging in discussions with the vendors, DOL issued the task order to a third vendor. Id. at ¶¶ 12-13. 2TechJV protested that award decision with our Office; we dismissed the protest after the agency announced its intent to take corrective action. Id. at ¶¶ 16-17; see 2TechJV, LLC, B‑420960, B‑420960.2, Aug. 26, 2022 (unpublished decision). As part of the agency’s corrective action, DOL issued a revised RFQ that changed the type of contract from fixed‑price to labor-hours for certain CLINs.