ISI Professional Services (15F06723Q0000212)

B-421932 Dec 08, 2023 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Interior Systems, Inc., d/b/a ISI Professional Services (ISI), a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) of Sterling, Virginia, protests the decision of the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to reject its quotation submitted in response to request for quotations (RFQ) No. 15F06723Q0000212, for personnel to support the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The protester argues that the agency's decision to reject its quotation was contrary to established law and otherwise unreasonable. We deny the protest. View Decision DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. The entire decision has now been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Interior Systems, Inc., d/b/a ISI Professional Services File: B-421932 Date: December 8, 2023 Eric A. Valle, Esq., Isaias “Cy” Alba, IV, Esq., Katherine B. Burrows, Esq., Jacqueline K. Unger, Esq., and Dozier L. Gardner Jr., Esq., Piliero Mazza, PLLC, for the protester. Carlos S. Pedraza, Esq., and Camille Small-Simon, Esq., Department of Justice, for the agency. Raymond Richards, Esq., and John Sorrenti, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Protest challenging the agency’s decision to reject the protester’s quotation is denied where the protester’s timely submitted quotation lacked required information and was therefore technically unacceptable and its subsequently submitted quotation was properly rejected by the agency as late in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. DECISION Interior Systems, Inc., d/b/a ISI Professional Services (ISI), a service‑disabled veteran‑owned small business (SDVOSB) of Sterling, Virginia, protests the decision of the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to reject its quotation submitted in response to request for quotations (RFQ) No. 15F06723Q0000212, for personnel to support the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The protester argues that the agency’s decision to reject its quotation was contrary to established law and otherwise unreasonable. We deny the protest. Background The FBI’s NICS section is tasked with providing timely determinations on individuals’ eligibility to possess firearms or explosives in accordance with federal law. Agency Report (AR), Tab 3‑1, Conformed RFQ (RFQ) at 3. The instant procurement seeks qualified personnel to support the NICS section. Id. at 5. On June 29, 2023, the FBI issued the RFQ as an SDVOSB set‑aside under the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) procedures of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 8.4. Contracting Officer’s Statement (COS) at 1; RFQ at 3, 24, 29. The RFQ was issued to holders of General Services Administration (GSA) multiple award schedule (MAS) contracts with special item number 541611 (Professional Services‑Business Administrative Services). RFQ at 24. Of relevance to the protest, the RFQ stated that all terms and conditions and contract clauses included in vendors’ GSA MAS contracts would apply to the instant solicitation. Id. at 3, 19. The RFQ contemplated the issuance of a task order with both fixed‑price and labor‑hour contract line item numbers, for a 1‑year base period and four 1‑year option periods. Id. at 3‑4, 13. The task order would be issued to the vendor whose quotation represented the best value to the government considering the following four evaluation factors listed in descending order of importance: technical; relative experience; security; and price. Id. at 29‑32. Vendors were warned that quotations failing to respond to or follow the RFQ’s instructions could result in the quotation’s removal from consideration. Id. at 26. The agency expressly reserved the right to “remove from award consideration any [quotation] that [did] not conform to all requirements in the solicitation.” Id. at 29. Relevant to the protest, quotations were required to include a cover letter and a discrete volume addressing each evaluation factor. Id. at 24‑25. Under the relative experience factor, vendors were required to submit a narrative detailing their relevant experience as it related to performance of the agency’s requirements. Id. at 28 (“The [vendor] shall provide a narrative no more than six (6) pages on the template provided”). Vendors were required to demonstrate three examples of their relative experience as a prime contractor. Id. Additionally, vendors were allowed to submit one example of relative experience performed as a subcontractor, and one example performed by a proposed subcontractor. Id. The relative experience factor would be evaluated on a confidence scale of: high confidence; some confidence; low confidence; or neutral confidence. Id. at 31‑32.