Minburn Technology Group, LLC ()

B-422027.2 Feb 22, 2024 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Minburn Technology Group, LLC, of Great Falls, Virginia, requests reconsideration of our decision in Minburn Tech. Grp., LLC, B-422027, Oct. 10, 2023 (unpublished decision), dismissing its protest challenging the award of a sole-source contract to Echelon Services, LLC, a small business of Manassas, Virginia. The sole-source contract was awarded by the Department of the Treasury under the Small Business Administration's (SBA) 8(a) small disadvantaged business contracting program, for an enterprise agreement for Microsoft brand software products and maintenance and cloud computing services. Minburn argues that our Office erred in dismissing its protest based on the unsupported representations of the agency. We deny the request for reconsideration. View Decision Decision Matter of: Minburn Technology Group, LLC--Reconsideration File: B-422027.2 Date: February 22, 2024 G. Matthew Koehl, Esq., Minburn Technology Group, LLC, for the requester. Kasia Dourney, Esq., and Alexander O. Levine, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Request for reconsideration is denied where the requester has not shown that our prior decision contained an error of fact or law warranting reversal or modification. DECISION Minburn Technology Group, LLC, of Great Falls, Virginia, requests reconsideration of our decision in Minburn Tech. Grp., LLC, B‑422027, Oct. 10, 2023 (unpublished decision), dismissing its protest challenging the award of a sole-source contract to Echelon Services, LLC, a small business of Manassas, Virginia. The sole-source contract was awarded by the Department of the Treasury under the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) 8(a) small disadvantaged business contracting program, for an enterprise agreement for Microsoft brand software products and maintenance and cloud computing services. Minburn argues that our Office erred in dismissing its protest based on the unsupported representations of the agency. We deny the request for reconsideration. BACKGROUND The agency elected to procure the requirement under the SBA’s 8(a) small disadvantaged business contracting program.[1] To that end, the agency’s Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU) identified three 8(a) small business concerns, including Echelon, that could perform the requirement. Req. for Dismissal at 1. Minburn--the incumbent on the current Microsoft requirement--was not among those identified firms. Id. Subsequently, the agency requested quotations from the three identified 8(a) firms and determined that two of them were not eligible for award, as they were not registered for the North American Industry Classification code used for the requirement. Id. at 2. Echelon was the only firm with a valid registration. Id. On September 14, 2023, the agency submitted an 8(a) direct award offer letter request to the SBA, for a sole-source award to Echelon. Id.; see Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 19.804-3. On September 20, the SBA notified the agency it would conduct an adverse impact analysis for the incumbent Minburn, in accordance with 13 C.F.R. § 124.504(c).[2] Req. for Dismissal at 2. Notwithstanding the direct award request, on September 21, as an alternative procurement strategy for the requirement,[3] the agency issued request for quotations (RFQ) No. 1661400 on an unrestricted basis via the General Services Administration’s e-Buy system. Id. Subsequently, Minburn submitted its quotation in response to the RFQ. Protest at 2. While the agency awaited the SBA’s approval, the Treasury OSDBU advised that it concurred with the agency’s determination that an adverse impact analysis was not necessary, and recommended the agency proceed with the sole-source award. Req. for Dismissal at 2. Ultimately, on September 25, the agency awarded the sole-source contract to Echelon. Id. On September 26, the agency cancelled the RFQ. Protest at 1. On September 28, the SBA issued its acceptance letter. Req. for Dismissal at 2. On September 29, Minburn filed its protest with our Office challenging the agency’s sole-source award to Echelon. Specifically, the protester alleged that the agency awarded the contract at a price exceeding the fair market price, in violation of FAR sections 19.806(b) and 19.807(b). Protest at 3-5. The agency asked our Office to dismiss the protest, arguing that Minburn was not an interested party to maintain its protest because the firm was not a small business and as such, the protester would not be able to compete for the requirement even if its protest was sustained. Req. for Dismissal at 3. The agency also maintained that Minburn’s quoted price in response to the RFQ did not include “true-up costs” and additional supplies, hence, its quotation was “largely nonresponsive even in the event the matter had not been set aside for small business.” Id.